INDIA asked to retain reference to the International Plant Protection Convention in the text on documentation on LMOs for contained use. 

Above photo L-R: Desh Deepak Verma and Veena Chhotray (India)

BRAZIL noted its concern about the implementation of unique identifiers for LMOs for intentional introduction. 

Above photo: Brazilian delegates in a huddle.

The United States sought clarification on the reference to risk assessment with non-Parties in the Annex on the transboundary LMO movement between Parties and non-Parties, and asked to include reference to other relevant stakeholders.

Above photo: Delegates from the US

NAMIBIA noted its suggestion to refer to the unique identifier for ease of traceability of LMOs for contained use. 

Above photo: George Rhodes (Namibia)

The EU requested to re-insert a Paragraph asking the expert group to consider modes of adoption and format for any possible outcome from Article 27 (Liability and redress) of the Protocol, in order not to prejudge the outcome regarding the legal status of the regime. 

Above photo: Owen Ryan (Ireland)

Ethiopia opposed, stressing that the regime will be legally binding, as provided for by Article 27 (Liability and redress) of the Biosafety Protocol. 

Above photo: Tewolde Berhan Egzhiaber (Ethiopia)

Colombia said the group of legal and technical experts should finalize its work within four years. 

Above photo L-R: Emilio Garcia and Alvaro Rodriguez (Colombia)

Malaysia suggested that the expert group finalize its work by 2008, stressing the importance of giving a clear mandate to the expert group. 

Above photo: Hashin Hassan (Malaysia)

Delegates decided that participation in the expert group should be based on inclusiveness, transparency and technical expertise, with experts designated by Parties, other governments and relevant international organizations. Regarding contact points for information on documentation accompanying LMO-FFPs, delegates agreed to include reference to the last exporter, the first importer, and any other appropriate authority. Delegates also discussed, but did not reach agreement on, adopting interim measures for the use of documentation for LMO-FFPs, pending a decision on the use of a stand alone document by the COP/MOP. 

Right photo: Contact group dais on LMO-FFPS (ARTICLE 18.2 (A))

Working Group I Chair François Pythoud (Switzerland) reported on progress made in Working Group I, noting that the contact group on handling, packaging, transport and identification had been able to remove most of the outstanding brackets during the day.

Working Group II Chair Amb. Philémon Yang (Cameroon) said that Working Group II had adopted two CRPs on capacity building and the roster of experts for capacity building and that the contact group on compliance had made progress as well.

Linda Brown (UK) reported on progress made in the Friends of the President group on the guidance to the GEF.  

Ernesto Cespedes (Mexico) reported that the Friends of the President group on priority setting had decided to establish LMO-FFPs, capacity building with particular emphasis on the BCH, compliance, and liability and redress as priority issues.