Maas Goote
@maasmarinus.bsky.social
International Environmental Lawyer. Involved in international policy&law for over 25 years. Former EU climate negotiator (UNFCCC). NL Head of Delegation to many Environmental Agreements, including The Montreal Protocol. Now owner of Carraway Strategies.
If it turns out, in discussing the point of order, that the adoption was flawed, because a Party was denied the floor prior to adoption (wanting to raise a formal objection) and after adoption (again with an objection), a President should rule that the decision should be put to the floor again.
November 24, 2024 at 5:32 PM
If it turns out, in discussing the point of order, that the adoption was flawed, because a Party was denied the floor prior to adoption (wanting to raise a formal objection) and after adoption (again with an objection), a President should rule that the decision should be put to the floor again.
Normally a request for the floor is done by pushing a button, but if ignored you can stand up, wave your flag (country nameplate) — and demand a point of order. A Chair is required to address a point of order immediately, before any other issue.
November 24, 2024 at 5:10 PM
Normally a request for the floor is done by pushing a button, but if ignored you can stand up, wave your flag (country nameplate) — and demand a point of order. A Chair is required to address a point of order immediately, before any other issue.
The UNFCCc practice on ‘objections’ evolved quickly in first part of the 2000s. In essence, when a Party wants to object to the adoption of a decision, it has to formally object (with that word) twice: prior to the adoption and immediately afterwards.
November 24, 2024 at 9:04 AM
The UNFCCc practice on ‘objections’ evolved quickly in first part of the 2000s. In essence, when a Party wants to object to the adoption of a decision, it has to formally object (with that word) twice: prior to the adoption and immediately afterwards.