[wordup] UN organisation seeks to silence Greenpeace

[Adam Shand]

From:  
http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/news/details?item_id=351578
More:  
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/oneworld/20031118/ 
wl_oneworld/4536730811069167608

UN organisation seeks to silence Greenpeace
Mon 17 November 2003
UNITED KINGDOM/London

One year following the Prestige oil spill, the International Maritime  
Organisation (IMO) has done nothing to prevent further catastrophes.  
Instead, the organisation is trying to remove the consultative status  
of one of its most outspoken critics: Greenpeace. Here's what you can  
do to help ensure the IMO has to factor in the voice of the planet and  
its people when it makes decisions, rather than just the voices of  
vested interests in the shipping industry.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.tiff
Type: image/tiff
Size: 240 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.spack.org/pipermail/wordup/attachments/20031119/a6ab1c6e/attachment.tiff 
-------------- next part --------------

The International Maritime Organisation (IMO) is the UN body charged 
with responsibility for ensuring 'safer ships' and 'cleaner seas.' 
Greenpeace has had consultative status since 1991, and has worked for 
stricter regulations against dozens of environmentally unsound 
practices, from the transport of high-level radioactive waste at sea to 
a ban on single-hulled oil tankers.

The IMO Council took action to expel Greenpeace in June 2002. Several 
member states, including Cyprus and Turkey, lodged complaints that 
Greenpeace practiced unsafe seamanship. Not coincidentally, several of 
these countries are Flag of Convenience states, which have been the 
targets of Greenpeace protests for operating unsafe oil tankers or 
carrying unsafe cargoes in the past. Without a vote, the Chair decided 
to uphold the complaints and expel Greenpeace, saying the decision 
would be "forwarded for formal decision to the IMO Assembly." That 
assembly takes place between November 24 and December 5 in London.

This decision is unprecedented.

At forums such as the IMO, Greenpeace speaks for the oceans. We speak 
for the ecosystems that have no high-paid lobbyists to defend them, for 
the whales and dolphins that can't lodge a complaint against the oil 
giants. We counterbalance industry lobby groups as Intertanko, the 
industry association of supertanker owners. (Which, incidentally, has 
never had its consultative status threatened for "unsafe seamanship" 
despite the fact that supertanker oil spills such as the Exxon Valdez, 
the Erika, and the Prestige have been responsible for environmental, 
economic, and human catastrophes the world over.)

Greenpeace International has Consultative Status in Category II with 
ECOSOC (the UN Economic and Social Council), and we take part as an 
official observer at a wide range of political conferences and 
conventions. No other forum, either regional or global, has ever 
expelled Greenpeace.

Under the IMO's own guidelines, an observer can be expelled for 
specified reasons, for example if an organisation has failed to attend 
meetings regularly or changed its activities. None of these are grounds 
that can be made against Greenpeace.

Rather, following the complaints made by some member states, the IMO is 
claiming that some Greenpeace activities, in highlighting the 
environmental problems associated with shipping, has contravened the 
1972 collision regulations; so-called COLREGS. These are important 
safety laws which aim to ensure safety at sea. It has not been 
contested by any State that Greenpeace is a non-violent organisation 
and uses peaceful means to highlight bad practices. The IMO moves are 
based on complaints such as protests against GMO shipments, substandard 
tankers and nuclear shipments.

We believe that the safety of life at sea and the protection of the 
marine environment are of paramount importance. These concerns underpin 
all our work - both the issues we address and how we address them.

Safety comes first for Greenpeace at all times. Our activists are 
thoroughly trained, our nautical standards and expertise have earned 
the respect of coast guards and maritime specialists around the world. 
Unlike the oil industry, we don't put other people's lives or the 
environment at risk with our actions.

The claims made in the IMO are false. Greenpeace has never been taken 
to court, much less prosecuted for violating COLREGS. In fact, when we 
were first granted consultative status, Greenpeace made a commitment to 
abide by the rules of good seamanship, including the COLREGS and has 
reaffirmed this commitment to the IMO since then.

Furthermore, the way that Greenpeace operates and the issues which we 
tackle have not changed since we were first given consultative status 
in 1991. And our fundamental commitment to speak out on behalf of the 
planet, despite attempts to shut us down and shut us up, has not 
changed since 1971.

The reality is that our activities have upset some members of the 
shipping industry - those which are involved in environmentally 
damaging activities. If the IMO's mission is truly to protect the seas 
and ensure safer shipping, they shouldn't be shooting the messenger: 
they should be taking action now to ensure disasters like the Prestige 
oil spill never happen again.

Take Action

Send a message to the IMO: Don't Silence Greenpeace.

Here are the responses to date to our written request to know where 
members stand on evicting Greenpeace. We'll update this chart as more 
nations clarify their position. You can help them clarify their 
position by sending a message telling them not to silence Greenpeace.


Supporting Greenpeace Consultative Status?

Argentina
No Response

Australia
No Response

Austria
No Response

Belgium
No Response

Brazil
No Response

Canada
No Response

Chile
No Response

China
No Response

Denmark
On the condition that Greenpeace International in a convincing manner 
confirm [obligations to safety at sea], the government does not intend 
to support the proposal of taking away Greenpeace International's 
consultative status

Fiji
No Response

Finland
Finland is unlikely to support Greenpeace

France
Supports Greenpeace

Germany
No Response

Greece
No Response

India
No Response

Ireland
No Response

Israel
Supporting Greenpeace

Italy
No Response

Japan
No Response

Lebanon
No Response

Luxembourg
No Response

Malaysia
No Response

Malta
Supporting Greenpeace

Mexico
No Response

Netherlands
Supports Greenpeace, giving the organisation a year to demonstrate 
compliance with safety regulations

New Zealand
No Response

Norway
No Response

Panama
No Response

Peru
No Response

Philippines
No Response

Russian Federation
No Response

Spain
Spain will support Greenpeace maintaining its consultative status... at 
the same time, Spain will demand that Greenpeace, or any other 
organization with consultative status in IMO, respect the laws of 
marine security.

Sweden
No Response

Switzerland
No Response

Thailand
No Response

Turkey
No Response

United Kingdom
No Response

United States of America
Meeting with Greenpeace November 18th