Monitoring Compliance and Enforcement

The Conference of states parties of the Framework Convention has already established a process for the review of information by Annex I states parties. The Kyoto Protocol has built thereupon and strengthened this process. Whereas under the Framework Convention the inventory information, though collected annually, was published and reviewed only in conjunction with the periodic 

It may seem that the noncompliance procedure under the climate change regime is less stringent than those in other recent international environmental agreements. Although Article 13 of the Framework Convention calls for the consideration of a multilateral consultative process for questions regarding implementation and Article 10 of the Framework Convention establishes a Subsidiary Body for Implementation, the functions of the latter are limited. The Subsidiary Body is called upon to . . . assist the Conference of Parties in the assessment review of the Convention. .. and thus lacks the competence to deal with individual cases. Equally, the mandate of the Conference of Parties to establish a noncompliance system is limited. The parties are only called upon to . . . consider the establishment of a multilateral consultative process, available to Parties on their request for the resolution of questions regarding the implementation of the Convention. . . . This mandate lacks the focus on the noncompliance of individual states parties which is characteristic of the Montreal Protocol and the Second Sulphur Protocol. 

---