Letter to the UNFF

NGO and IPO concerns regarding the United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF) and the Collaborative Partnership on Forests (CPF)

Dear friends,

Please find below a letter (in rtf format: English, Spanish and French) to the
United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF) expressing serious concerns
regarding this new Forum and its backward approach to major group
participation in forest policy making. The letter also criticises the
Secretariat's sluggishness to act on key civil society and indigenous
recommendations on ways to promote the implementation of intergovernmental
commitments on forests.

These concerns have been made verbally for several years, but several NGOs
and indigenous peoples' organisations consider that it is now high time
our concerns are placed in writing in a formal letter to the secretariat
of the UNFF.

To endorse please send your mail to tom@fppwrm.gn.apc.org by May 2003.

Please indicate: Name + organisation + country. Many thanks in advance for your support.

Mr. Pekka Patosaari
Co-ordinator and Head
Secretariat
United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF)
Two UN Plaza, DC 22nd Floor,
New York, NY 10017

Fax: +1 917 367 3186

Dear Mr. Patosaari,

NGO and IPO concerns regarding the United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF) and the Collaborative Partnership on Forests (CPF)

By means of this letter we, the undersigned NGOs, indigenous peoples' organisations and individuals, write to advise you of our serious concern that the UNFF is failing to build on the principles and guarantees established more than 10 years ago at UNCED. At the same time, we are disappointed that the UNFF secretariat and Bureau have so far been slow to act on NGO concerns and recommendations regarding the UNFF and CPF.

In short, we wish to alert you to our genuine concern that the UNFF is failing to implement its mandate as set out in ECOSOC resolution E/2000/L.32*. In particular, we are concerned that the UNFF is not fulfilling its function as "...a coherent, transparent, and participatory global framework for policy implementation, co-ordination and development...based on the Rio Declaration (and)...chapter 11 of Agenda 21." We also feel the Forum has so far failed to "...build upon the transparent and participatory practices established by the CSD, the IPF and IFF." Specifically, we are concerned that:

Re. UNFF

Intersessional meetings have not been widely publicised. In several recent cases only a limited number of invitations have been issued to NGOs;

The UNFF has failed to agree that major groups should be recognised as experts in the development of terms of reference for ad hoc expert groups - despite the fact that this precedent is already established under other forest-related bodies in the UN including the CBD and UNFCCC;

No dedicated funds have been made available to assist representatives of major groups to attend UNFF sessions, inter-sessionals and expert groups. A shortage of funds for disadvantaged groups such as NGOs and indigenous peoples has long been highlighted as a major obstacle to effective participation in international forest policy making;

Although the multiple benefits of MAR have (in principle) been recognised as critical for the effectiveness of the UNFF in fulfilling its tasks of promoting the implementation of intergovernmental agreements on forests, there has been little action and a distinct lack of any sense of urgency to deal with this vital issue on the part of the UNFF secretariat and the governmental members of the Forum;

Agreed standards on the participation rights of major groups have been disregarded and sometimes actively opposed by governmental members of the UNFF during its first two formal sessions in 2001 and 2002. In particular, language relating to major groups and participatory processes has been consistently deleted or diluted by delegates at both UNFF sessions and intersessional meetings.

Re. Multistakeholder Dialogue
The multi-stakeholder dialogue (MSD) segment of the UNFF has failed to achieve its objectives and the MSD at UNFF2 was generally viewed as a failure;
Recent preparatory meetings for the next MSD at UNFF3 did not feature balanced participation by major groups as environmental and social justice NGOs and indigenous peoples' organisations were absent from the discussions - largely because there was a lack of funds to assist them to travel to and attend the meeting;

Re. Collaborative Partnership on Forests
Key NGO and indigenous recommendations on the CPF and CPF Network have been largely disregarded and CPF meetings remain closed to major group observers;
The CPF Network has so far not become active, despite being officially established over a year ago in March 2002;

We therefore call on you as Head of the UNFF to take immediate measures to promote the effective implementation of the Forum's mandate in order to ensure at least some concrete and progressive outcomes prior to UNFF5. In this regard, we recommend that, as a minimum, every effort is made by the members of the UNFF secretariat and the Bureau to:

Keep the focus of the dialogue at the UNFF on implementation of agreed intergovernmental commitments on forests;

Recognise the status and important role of the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues in relation to the deliberations of the UNFF and CPF;

Give utmost priority to promoting the formulation and adoption of innovative, participatory, cross-sectoral and implementation-focused monitoring assessment and reporting procedures for the UNFF;

Establish a fund to assist representatives of major groups, especially indigenous peoples' organisations and NGOs, to attend UNFF sessions, inter-sessionals, preparatory meetings and expert group discussions;

Ensure the participation of major group observers in CPF meetings and other regional forest-related meetings such as the FAO Regional Forestry Commissions where they concern the IPF/IFF Proposals for Action;

Reform the entire format of the UNFF sessions to foster a more interactive dialogue on the challenges, successes and lessons learned regarding the implementation of the IPF/IFF Proposals for Action.

Ensure the involvement of major groups in UNFF meetings, in intersessionals and in technical expert groups using practices already established under other forest-related processes within the UN family. The UNFF should explicitly recognise major groups as being able to provide 'experts' in technical expert group meetings.

We fear that if these points are not addressed soon, the UNFF will lose its credibility with civil society groups and indigenous peoples and subsequently with governments. We therefore look forward to learning how you plan to address the issues and concerns raised above.

Yours sincerely,

Tom Griffiths, Forest Peoples Programme, UK
Andrei Laletin, Friends of the Siberian Forests, Russia
Miguel Lovera, Global Forest Coalition
Ricardo Carrere, World Rainforest Movement
Marcial Arias, International Alliance of Indigenous-Tribal Peoples of the Tropical Forests
Saskia Ozinga, FERN, UK

To endorse please send your mail to tom@fppwrm.gn.apc.org by May 2003.

Please indicate: Name + organisation + country. Many thanks in advance for your support.