Twenty-eighth meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice (SBSTTA-28) - Evening session

Good evening, colleagues, and welcome back. This is our final plenary session, and I count on you to continue in the spirit of compromise and cooperation that marked our plenary this afternoon. Let's move to the consideration of conference room papers. CRP 5 on Agenda Item 7, Paupa. Dear colleagues, we will now take up CRP 5 on Agenda Item 7, Scientific and Technical Needs to Support the Implementation of the Kunming-Montréal Global Biodiversity Framework. strategic review and of an update to the program of work on protected area. Before I open the floor, I would like to give the floor to the Secretariat to announce some technical corrections to the text. Secretariat, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. In the preamble paragraph beginning, recognizing that ecological representativeness, it should read conserved and managed on the third line. In the operative paragraph 6, there should be brackets around and non-sovereign contributors as financing mechanisms. In operative paragraph 9, the As appropriate in the first line should be deleted. In operative paragraph 14, the brackets around and the integration of traditional knowledge should be deleted. And finally, in the Annex, in the title to Section 1, protected and conserved areas should be in brackets. Thank you.

Thank you, Secretariat. Now I give the floor to Brazil. Brazil, you have the floor.

Thank you, Mr. Co-Chair. I would kindly ask the Secretariat to read it again in a slower pace, please. Thank you.

Thank you, Brazil. Now I give the floor to Russia. Russia Federation, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair.

We actually have the same request to read the corrections slowly that we can capture them, and we believe we have another thing here to add.

Thank you.

Thank you, Russia Federation. Please, Secretariat, read slowly, word after word, to be clear. Thank you. Secretariat, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair, and apologies. In the preambular paragraph beginning, recognizing that ecological representativeness, it should read conserved and managed on the 3rd line. In operative paragraph 6, there should be brackets around and non-sovereign contributors such as financing mechanisms. In operative paragraph 9, the as appropriate in the first line should be deleted. In operative paragraph 14, In 4, the brackets around and the integration of traditional knowledge should be deleted. And finally, in the Annex, in the title to Section 1, protected and conserved areas should be in brackets. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Secretariat. With these amendments, I would like to propose that we approve the CRP as a whole. Russia Federation, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. We have a small thing in paragraph—

in operative paragraph 3. We had a long discussion with many brackets here about the definition, which is in brackets in paragraph 4. And in paragraph 3, in the 4th line, recognizing indigenous and traditional territories where applicable, need to be in brackets consistent with the language in paragraph 2. So please put brackets after measures. Then in brackets it goes like comma recognizing indigenous and traditional territories where applicable. Close brackets. That's our amendment.

Thank you.

Merci à la Fédération.

Thank you to the Russian Federation. I see that there are. Many requests for the floor, but since we are so short on time, I would ask everyone to continue to be guided by the spirit of cooperation we had earlier today. I will give the floor to 2 more parties who have requested the floor.

Thank you.

But I really urge you not to reopen the debate which characterized the work of the Contact Group. I will give the floor first to Fiji followed by Brazil. Fiji, you have the floor.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

We kindly request the Secretariat if they could repeat the changes from para 6. It's a bit hard for us to follow through what was said earlier. Thank you.

Merci, Fiji.

Thank you, Fiji. Secretariat, could you read that out?

Thank you, Chair, and apologies once again. In operative paragraph 6, There should be brackets around and non-sovereign contributors to financing mechanisms. In operative paragraph 9, the as appropriate in the first line should be deleted. In operative paragraph 14, the brackets around and the integration of traditional knowledge should be deleted. And finally, in the annex, in the title of Section 1, protected and conserved areas should be deleted— sorry, should be in brackets. Excuse me.

Thank you.

Merci au secrétariat.

Thank you to the Secretariat. Now we will give the floor to Brazil.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would kindly ask I would like to ask the Secretariat if it could move the pages there to the annex, because given the fact that we didn't have a consensus on paragraph 11 on the decision to create the 5th element, we would like to add a small amendment to the annex and include in targets 1, 2, 3, 4, and 12, In brackets, in between brackets, the following text: additional complementary activities on ecological connectivity.

Merci au Brésil.

Thank you, Brazil. I see no further requests for the floor. So I will continue.

This CRP reflects the extensive work. Merci, chers collègues.

Thank you, dear colleagues. With the changes that have been made to the CRP, Can we now approve this CRP with these changes? I see no request for the floor. The CRP is adopted.

Approved.

Is approved.

Yeah, dear colleagues, I repeat, CRP 5 is approved. We will produce an L document for this item. Now let's move to, to the consideration of L doc— L document. That's fine.

I thought we were gonna—

As I said earlier, let's continue with the consideration of We will now return to L documents beginning with document L4 under agenda item 5, synthetic biology. Thank you, Now I submit for adoption document L4. Can we adopt this recommendation? I see Norway. Norway, you have the floor.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So this is to address the technical brackets that were introduced by New Zealand in the CRP round. We didn't necessarily regard those technical brackets that were put there as technical, but it relates, in our view, to substance. Not wanting to spoil the party, We would like to have our view of the substance reflected in the report. So, I will then make the following statement, which I will send to the Secretariat in writing. Norway would like to state that we regard the open-ended online forum on synthetic biology as an independent option and not necessarily related to the continuation of the ad hoc technical expert group on synthetic biology. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Norway. Now I give the floor to Australia. Australia, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. Australia requested during the contact group that we would like to note that not all elements No aspects of the thematic action plan were able to be discussed from Section 3.1 to the end of the table in Annex 1. We'd like this reflected in the meeting report, please. There was also no discussion on the timing of the provision of the ARTEG report to a sub-sta prior to COP18 for consideration at COP18, as included in paragraph 12 of the L document. This timing was not discussed, and we would like to please record that this is not something that the contact group discussed and is dependent on further negotiations in Armenia.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Australia. Now I give the floor to Fiji. Fiji, you have the floor.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. We would just like to seek clarification on the way forward with regards to this L document. It is our understanding that there would still be an opportunity to further negotiate and introduce text on the document in COP, so we were just seeking clarification from you, Chair, and the Secretariat if this is— if our understanding is correct and this is the way forward in terms of—

Delegation.

of the document. We also— for us, it's a small delegation and we are thinly spread across most of these tracks. We didn't get a lot of opportunity to discuss on the item, so we're just seeking clarification on the way forward in terms of the document, noticing that there is a lot of bracket around the text. Thank you.

Thank you, Fiji.

I've taken note of what you've said, and I thank you for the comments. I would like to come back to the adoption of our document L4. Can we adopt the recommendation? I see no objections or requests for the floor. Therefore, L4 is adopted.

Fiji, you have the floor.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm so sorry to come back, but I did not hear any answer to the clarification that I asked earlier before you had gavelled on the document. So I'm just seeking perhaps again clarification and your confirmation on the question that I had asked earlier. Thank you.

Thank you, Fiji. Now I give the floor to Secretariat.

Thank you, Mr. President. Fiji, just to say that your understanding is correct. At COP, the agenda items will be considered fully at the COP. And the text is fully open for negotiation until it is adopted as a final COP decision.

Thank you.

Thank you, Secretariat. Now let's move to the next item. We will now turn our attention to document Subsidiary 28/L5, Under agenda item 6, sustainable wildlife management, I submit for adoption document L5. Can we adopt this recommendation? I see no requests for the floor. It's adopted. Thank you, colleagues. Now let's move to the next agenda, the consideration of CRP 6. CRP 6 on Agenda Item 3. Dear delegates, we will now take up our final conference room paper, CRP 6/Rev. 1, on Agenda Item 3. This is our— this is one CRP that contains 2 separate recommendations. A, on a global review on collective progress, and B, further announcing planning, monitoring, reporting, and review mechanism, including the monitoring framework for the KMGBF. We are approving the CRP as well. It will be published as 2 separate draft decisions for COP17. The CRP has been developing through extensive discussions. A contact group met throughout this week. It also established the Friends of the Chair group. There were long deliberations on the CRP where the colleagues showed a strong willingness to compromise. I remind you that the meeting of the subsidiary body on implementation will start in a few days. It will consider the global review in its— deliberations. The recommendation from SAPSAA will be integrated with the recommendation of SBI, and the COP will have one consolidated decision on this issue. Before I open the floor, I would like to give the floor to the Secretariat to announce some technical corrections to the Secretariat, you have the floor.

So, as mentioned, this CRP includes 2 recommendations, and I will go through the corrections for each of them. So, on A, in the 3rd preambular paragraph, in the 2nd line, it says preparation of global report. It should read preparation of the global report. In the 4th preambular paragraph, on the last line, it says important in the global review, and the word role is missing. So it should say that science played an important role in the global review, as opposed to just played an important in the global review.

In the—

throughout this document, there are 5 instances where it says small island developing states. Among them, it should read small island developing states without the among them. Then moving on to recommendation B, in the 3rd paragraph, it says technical and scientific support centers. The word cooperation is missing, and the word cooperation should be in that so it's the correct term for those centers.

Thank you.

Thank you, Secretariat. Colleagues, given the time pressure we are under, I can recognize on my screen Brazil, followed by Russia. Brazil, you have the floor.

Thank you, Mr. Co-Chair. It's the same thing. It's too fast, please, especially Session B. Thank you.

Thank you, Brazil. Now I give the floor to Russia Federation.

Good evening, distinguished Mr. Chair. I have a few comments. Thank you very much to the Secretariat for the corrections of a number of mistakes, and thank you very much to the colleagues for the very constructive work. I can express these comments now, or we can wait for the Secretariat to reply to Brazil's question.

Merci.

Thank you to the Russian Federation. I will first give the floor to the Secretariat to reply to Brazil's request, and then we will come back to you. Secretary, you have the floor.

So I believe you caught my error on the Section B that I made. So it's not in the main part of the document, it's in the annex. And so in the 2nd annex, 2B, in the 3rd paragraph, in the 2nd line, it says including the regional and sub-regional technical and scientific Support Centers. And the word cooperation will be added so that it's the correct name of those centers, which is Regional and Subregional Technical and Scientific Cooperation Centers— Support Centers. Do you want the other ones as well?

Yes.

So I'll read all of them again just for clarity. So the first change is in the 3rd preambular paragraph, the 2nd line. It currently reads preparation of global report. It should read preparation of the global report.

OK.

The 2nd change is in the next paragraph, the 4th preambular paragraph. It currently reads, and this is on the last line, but I'll read a bit of the line before, that science played an important in the global review. It should read that science played an important role in the global review. Then there are, throughout the entire document, both Section A and B, there are 5 cases. Where it says small island developing states among them. These are in, and it's a little confusing for me to list them because of the way this decision is numbered, but so these are in paragraph 5, 5, going through paragraph 11, and then in the second Part— wait. It is in E of paragraph 2 of the terms of reference of the—

ATAG.

ATAG. And lastly, it is in paragraph 4 of that same of that same annex. Thanks.

Thank you, Secretariat. Now I come back to Russia Federation. Maybe if it is the general comment, we can take it after the adoption, but if it is the substantive issue, go ahead. Go ahead, please.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Yes, this is on the text. In our view, some small amendments that we noted during our discussions.

I'd just like to draw attention to paragraph 5 of the first section, a small Roman 2, on the third line after particular and square bracket. We don't see the square brackets around the following 3 lines, so we like to open square bracket before whole, whole of the government, and close brackets after mainstreaming. That's the first change. Second change we discussed also extensively today at the contact group. It's paragraph 7. So we're happy to see that there were some reflections of some square brackets as we requested.

Yes.

during the day session, but we're still missing one set of brackets. So the brackets open at before it on the second line and closed after a risk. And I think the last— our comment we also discussed yesterday And we checked with other experts, also with our colleagues. So it's in Annex 2, paragraph 1, small a, first line. Technological advice on the further development of the methodology and metadata. As again, again, through the text, we everywhere we're using methodology, and several times we mentioned that we don't want to see only metadata. So— and that's it. And with those changes, we will be happy to adopt CRP. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you, Russia Federation. Now I give the floor to DRC. DRC, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair, for giving me the floor. I'll just highlight one element which we discussed within the Contact Group. This concerns Section A of the document. Paragraph 5. So point A, we agreed that we'll keep just scope and coverage. Everything else which is in brackets should be deleted. If these changes are incorporated, Then, just as the distinguished delegate of Russia, we will be happy to approve this document. Thank you.

Thank you to the DRC.

Merci.

Donc—

Thank you. So before giving the floor to Fiji, I'd like to address the comments made by the Russian Federation. We have taken note of these comments. Regarding the DRC's comments, I'll first give the floor to Fiji, but we are discussing the proposal, so I'll give the floor to Fiji. Fiji, you have the floor.

Sorry, sorry, Chair. Perhaps maybe I guess there is a difference in understanding on what was discussed in the Contact Group. We do understand that the 2 co-chairs had made a proposal to lift the brackets to which the distinguished delegate of Russia had introduced that instead of ambition it was— their preferred language was a scope and coverage, and to that reflection, our recollection was that some countries were still objecting to that replacement, and therefore the co-chairs had put these as options. So perhaps if we can be given some time quickly to just get this understanding, and then I also recollect that the third option of collective ambition was also suggested but was also not accepted. So therefore, 3 options are now presented as bracketed text with no consensus on the heading for Section A. But this is our recollection in the room, but there may be a variance in recollection. So perhaps the best way to move forward on this header, given that it is in bracket, We will be happy to have a bracket outside the 3 options of the bracket to then discuss this at COP.

Thank you.

I see that there are many requests for the floor. I would like to make a proposal with regards to what Fiji said we don't have the time to reopen discussions here. Could we therefore agree to put all text which has come up into brackets so that we can continue discussing this during COP17? If you are in agreement to If there are no objections to put everything in brackets in this document and to continue discussions at COP17, then we can continue with the adoption of the document as it is fully. I see that there are still Requests for the floor? Are these in disagreement with what I've just said, or do you have other proposals so that we can move forwards quicker? If that is the case, I will therefore give the floor to China, followed by Cameroon, and then DRC.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Comment on paragraph 7 of Section A. If you allow me, can I comment now or later?

Je suis.

I can allow you to make comments, but I would have liked to have some friends helping me if we could adopt the document with the proposal. proposal that I made, then I can accept comments, general ones, and then that's fine. But since this is the case, I will give you the floor. China, you have the floor.

The Federation just proposed about the brackets in paragraph 7 around its 2050 goals and the vision may be at risk, if I understand that correctly. But as we remember from the Contact Actually, 2050 goals and the vision may be at risk and unless the provision of means of implementation rapidly accelerated came as a package and as a whole paragraph 7 appeared because we want to have the balance. So we think it should have brackets around the whole paragraph. Thank you. It's already bracketed.

Merci.

Thank you. China? The entire paragraph is in brackets. That's what I proposed. Everything is in brackets. There isn't anything that's not. So since we can't come to an agreement, what I was going to propose was to have this text in brackets so that we can continue the debate at COP17.

Yeah, I give the floor to the Secretariat. Secretariat, you have the floor.

It could be that you're looking at the version before the rev. But if you look at the rev version, the entire paragraph 7 is in brackets. So maybe that was why you were not seeing the brackets.

OK.

Before giving the floor to Cameroon, DRC, and then Russia, I'm going to ask the Secretariat to reread where brackets have been proposed.

So the current brackets are in 5. They start before the brackets on political will, so it would be bracketing before that. And the brackets end after the last bracket, which is after ambition. Is there a drum? So basically, the entire heading that's under 5A would be in brackets. The second change is in 5A.2. And this starts on the third line. The brackets start before the word whole of government and the brackets end on the 5th line after the word mainstreaming. The other brackets that were introduced are on paragraph 7. There are brackets before its and after risk in the 2nd line. So there are 3 different— 3 places where there are brackets. Lastly, Russia introduced the word methodology and metadata into Annex 2.

Thank you, Secretariat. Now I give the floor to Cameroon, followed by DRC, and then Russia Federation. Cameroon, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair, for giving me the floor. We are aware of the fact that you want us to move forward so that we can have text to bring to the COP, but we would like to raise the point that the discussion in the contact group was done such as was proposed just now by DRC. I recall very well that when we closed the session, I was the last one to take the floor. I asked for the indulgence of the participants to say that we had consulted under the leadership of Armenia so that we could find a consensus to have a clear text and make progress. And finally, you can see from the contact group discussions, the co-chair spoke on this very point to ask whether we could accept the proposals in the chapeau and as a title, as a headline, have scope and coverage. Were there— the question was asked whether there were any objections. Nobody had any objections, and we applauded. So if now in plenary we're questioning that again and returning to proposals that were made, that's a problem. We want to help you and have brackets because the text will be discussed, but it's important to recognize that consensus that was found in the Contact Group. Thank you.

Thank you, Cameroon. I give the floor to DRC, followed by Russia.

Thank you, Chair. That noise is quite distracting, but we'll try to stay focused.

Mr.

Chair, Perhaps before we hear from DRC, since there is very loud noise in the room, would it be possible for those who are asking for the— who are making the noise to ask for the floors so we could hear from them?

Merci.

Thank you. Since we don't know who's making the noise, we will carry on.

C'est étrange.

It's strange that the noisemakers cannot identify themselves.

Okay, merci.

Thank you for your understanding. We will continue our consideration of this document. I give the floor to DRC, followed by Russia. DRC, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair, for giving me the floor. We've come here to negotiate, Mr. Chair, in good faith, and we think that we need to be transparent, truthful with ourselves, and correct. As Cameroon has just said, that's how it happened in the Contact Group This afternoon. Before the end of the contact group, the co-chairs asked whether everybody agreed on having Scope and Coverage as the title of this section, and there was no objection, Mr. Chair? And everybody agreed. Much to our surprise, we're now seeing that we've added other things that were discussed at length and which finally were rejected. We feel this is in bad faith. Then, if we look at the 2 paragraphs in this section, it only has to do with 2 elements: scope and coverage. If you look at the first paragraph, Roman numeral I, parties—

Please set national targets that had a higher level of scope and coverage of targets of the framework, an intermediate level of scope and coverage, and a lower level of scope and coverage.

It appears several times because it's so clearly that, that we're talking about. There's nothing else in there that could justify changing what was approved. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, DRC. I now give the floor to Russia.

Thank you, Chair. Our understanding of what happened in the Contact Group today is fully in line with what was said by the colleagues from Cameroon and DRC. We followed the discussions I think we need to focus very closely on these paragraphs, particularly because scope and coverage was proposed by us based on the text that uses them in the report. And as was quite rightly said by the colleague from DRC, it's in small Roman i.

Yes.

In the text directly below the point we're discussing. I remember it for a very simple reason. I was quite surprised and happy that at the end of the discussions in the contact group, we were able to resolve this issue. to a consensus and make a decision on a text without brackets. And 1 or 2 minutes after that, leaving the room, the colleagues from Cameroon and ourselves, we congratulated each other on the fact that we had managed to remove the brackets and achieve consensus. So, We feel that in this case, what was noted and observed by the colleague from DRC is quite correct. Thank you.

Merci donc.

Thank you, Russia.

Nous, we are.

Going into general comments, I agree on what was said and what was done. I will give the floor to the last 3 speakers, and then if we can finish the discussion after those 3 speakers, I will really call upon your spirit of cooperation. And then we will make a decision.

The floor is to the Netherlands, followed by Zimbabwe and then Brazil.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I'm speaking in my capacity as one of the co-chairs of this Contact Group. My fellow co-chair, Paulina Stawas, in the end indeed did explain the package, which would include scope and coverage, and thereby deleting all the brackets around paragraph 5. I do understand that there are different recollections because it was quite messy in the end, because we were really running out of time to come to a solution. But the colleague of the Democratic Republic of the Congo is indeed correct that that was the final proposal that was made from the co-chairs. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Netherlands. Now I give the floor to Zimbabwe, followed by Brazil and then Norway. Zimbabwe, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair, and thank you very much for trying to find a way forward on this. Chair, we were negotiating in good faith. faith in this contact group, and I will not waste time to explain what the co-chair has already said. It's also Zimbabwe's recollection that we had consensus as far as 5A is concerned with the scope and coverage, and we were happy with the outcome of that agreement that we had done in the Contact Group. So we'll be very delighted, Chair, if this submission, and also as explained by other earlier speakers such as Russia and DRC, if this can be really reflected in the CRP so that we can consider it as a true reflection of the outcome of our negotiations. Thank you.

Thank you, Zimbabwe. The next on my screen, Brazil, you have the floor.

Thank you, Mr. Co-Chair. I would like to show support for our colleague from the Netherlands and congratulate her work and Paulina's from Chile, and I fully trust their work and our other colleagues, which are DRC, Russia, and others. We were very tired, of course, but they were attentive at the time and we should follow this path.

Thank you very much. Thank you, Brazil. The last one on my screen is Norway. Norway, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. I'm really sorry to take the floor and prolong this consideration, but since there has been very limited time for observers to deliver statements during the contact groups, we feel that we should do that on their behalf. Norway would like to raise a statement made by the Global Youth Biodiversity Network regarding the introduction of a simplified reference to actors other than national governments and a footnote in CRP 6. We would like to support their statement as they are concerned of what consequences the use of this term could have for specific groups, in particular indigenous peoples and local communities, women and youth. Until we get more clarity on the implications of this approach, NORI proposes simply to bracket all references to actors other than national governance and the footnote 4 in the recommendation. And I really thank you, and sorry again for taking up the floor. Thank you.

Thank you, Norway. Dear colleagues, with the explanation of Cameroon, DRC, Netherlands, co-chairs, can we accept to political will and collective ambition. Can we accept this CRP and adopt it as well?

Thank you.

Okay, I see no requests for the floor. If you allow me, can we adopt— can we approve the CRP 6/Rev. 1 as the whole?

Yes.

I see Australia. Australia, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair, and I am very, very sorry to delay the proceedings, but I was just wondering the outcomes of the statement just made now by Norway to support the Global Youth Biodiversity Network's suggestion around bracketing all actors other than national governments and the footnote in this, because we would also support Norway in Thank you. Thank you.

Please, colleagues, let me give you my proposal before I consider Other requests of the floor? Do we agree to approve the world CRP with changes proposed by Russia and Norway and clarification made by DRC and co-chairs? I see more requests of the floor. I will give the floor to Fiji, followed by DRC, and then Argentina. Fiji, you have the floor.

Thank you, sir, Chair. I'm so sorry again for coming in, but I think in your explanation, based on the interventions by Cameroon, DRC, and our co-chair from Netherlands, once that clarity was provided that this actually happened in the room. Firstly, Fiji would like to withdraw its original statement. Secondly, we would like to then offer clarity that if this was what was agreed and it was agreed in consensus, then scope and ambition will not be in bracket and will be the only heading in A. This is our understanding right now on the way forward, and that will be what will be adopted without any brackets on A. And the only heading that stands is scope and ambition, which is agreed by consensus.

Thank you.

It was scope and coverage.

Thank you, Fiji. Now I give the floor to DRC. DRC, you have the floor, followed by Argentina.

Merci, Monsieur le Président.

Thank you, Chair. I think we're on the right path. We are heading towards adopting this document because we've just heard clarifications which were provided in order to maintain what we proposed. But what surprises us at the present time is 2 things. Firstly, well, the statement main on behalf of the observers, this was not discussed in the contact group. Secondly, we now have a clean text which we worked on a arduously in order to reach this conclusion. If we want to introduce this request here, we're not sure to what end, Chair. Therefore, my proposal would be simple.

I thank the RDC, says the chair.

I wasn't finished, says DRC. I was waiting For your full attention.

We have 1 minute in order to finish your comments, says the chair. Please go ahead, distinguished delegate from DRC.

Thank you, chair, for your clemency. My advice is you take into account what was said before this presentation by the observers, that is to adopt the document And then the rest can be presented at COP.

Thank you.

Thank you, DRC. I now give the floor to Argentina, followed by Norway and Zimbabwe. Argentina, you have the floor.

Thank you very much, Chair. I'm a bit confused, to say the truth. This working group met 4 times. Many parties were involved in the process. We worked a lot. We asked for flexibility from parties, and we achieved a good consensus. This definition was one which was agreed upon in the Contact Group, and we achieved consensually to achieve this document. So I'm a bit concerned to coming back to reopening discussions, because if we open discussions, including other stakeholders on a decision which was taken by all parties, then this is a very dangerous path to take. We're invited to adopt the full document without renegotiating any part of it. If we open this, then we— of course, we can open other paragraphs which we've already agreed upon as well. So I invite for us all to continue with the original decision.

Thank you.

And to ensure the continuity of the process in the best way possible. Thank you very much.

Gracias.

Thank you, Argentina.

To Norway, followed by Zimbabwe. Norway, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair, and sorry to create the confusion. We very much align with previous speakers and agree that this is a decided text now. We adopt it and we move on, but we would very I would very much like to make a record— statement in the record that the observers didn't get the chance to raise this issue in contact groups. And while I have the floor, I would also like to align myself with the statement made by Cameroon earlier that we definitely did agree on the scope and coverage in contact groups. So sorry again, and thank you.

Thank you, Norway. Now I give the floor to Zimbabwe.

Thank you, Chair, and thank you for your patience. Following what Noe has said, I would not want to prolong my intervention, but to say maybe we need to set a precedent that we can sustain, especially with regards to handling of some new text or new information, if other parties then start to introduce what also other actors might have missed to say, it might become very complicated and difficult to handle. So I think the way forward is already clear.

Thank you.

Thank you, Zimbabwe. Dear colleagues, Do we agree to approve the whole document, CRP, with changes proposed by Russia and clarification made by DRC and co-chairs? I see no requests for the floor. CRP 6/Rev.1 is approved.

Before moving on to other elements for review, I see I see a request for the floor from the DRC. You have the floor.

Thank you, Chair, for giving me the floor. Chair, the DRC is not taking the floor in order to go back on the adoption of this document, but rather to bring something to your attention. Transparency and equity, we need to not act in this manner. Thank you. Merci.

Thank you, DRC. I give the floor to Japan.

Thank you, Chair. Our Japanese comment is not on the substantial, just Japan requests the Secretariat to take into consideration to reflect the only one change that was discussed in this document to the global report, which is about the headline of the key messages that the Russian Federation and Cameroon and other distinguished delegates proposed.

Thank you.

Thank you, Japan. Please, those parties can upload their statement online so it can be in report— Norway, DRC, and Japan. Please. Now I give the floor to Argentina.

Muchas gracias.

Thank you very much, Chair. We also have interpretive statements to add to the report of the meeting. Would you like us to do it now or under the agenda item on the report? Thank you.

Merci, donc.

Thank you, Argentina. If your request for the floor concerns this current item, then allow me to adopt the L document, and following that, we can give you the possibility to make Any other comments? I see that you're in agreement with my proposal.

We will produce an L document for this item. We will now consider document Substa/28/L6 under agenda item 7. Colleagues, as you know, we approved the CRP under this agenda item earlier this afternoon. The document is posted, but it is not yet available in all languages. I beg your indulgence as I will propose that we proceed with the language versions that are currently available. Is there any objections? I see none. I submit for adoption document L.6.

Thank you.

Can we adopt this recommendation? I see no objection. L document 6 is adopted.

DRC, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair, for giving me the floor. Indeed, we understand that there were time constraints with regards to the translation of this document in the 6 official languages of the United Nations. before adoption. We would like to ask that this be noted in the report of the meeting. We also ask that our previous statements also be featured in the report. Thank you.

I thank the delegates from the DRC.

Indeed.

We urge you to upload your documents to the portal, your statements to the portal, so that they can be taken into account. We will now continue reviewing documents before us in the same manner. We don't yet have translation in all languages of the documents, so I will—

Donc, comme je disais, nous l'avons—

As I was saying, as we just did for L6, due to time constraints, we have Document L7 only in a single language. Once again, I ask for your indulgence. Are there any objections to adopting L7? Can we therefore adopt this recommendation? I see DRC. You have the floor. DRC, you have the floor. If not, perhaps it's a mistake.

No.

DRC, then go ahead. You have the floor.

Thank you, Chair, for giving me the floor. We are ready to adopt this document. The only issue is that we don't see it on the portal.

I'll give the floor to the Secretariat.

I believe it is. Maybe if you just refresh. Sorry, but it is online on my computer.

With that clarification from the Secretariat, are you satisfied with that response? DRC, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. Well, as the Secretariat was speaking, we saw it appear, so we can adopt this.

Thank you.

Thank you for your spirit of cooperation and for the spirit of cooperation guiding us all right now. I ask once again if we can adopt L7.

28/LZ is adopted. Thank you, colleagues. That completes our consideration of the draft recommendation. Now let's move to the next item, item 9, other matters. We have now reached Agenda Item 9, Order Matters. I open the floor for any order matters to be raised. I don't have any requests for the floor. Thank you, colleagues. I now close— oh, I see Colombia.

Colombia, you have the floor. Thank you, Chair. So I just want to note a few brief points. I will be brief. We positively value the spirit of compromise of parties in assessing the review of the implementation of the framework and IPBES and thematic action plan for the creation capacity building on synthetic biology, the voluntary guide on wildlife, the assessment and marine and coastal biodiversity. And we also highlight that in a cross-cutting manner throughout the text agreed, we have been moving forwards on the participation and recognition of indigenous peoples and local communities, Afro-descendants, in all topics under the Convention. In Colombia and in many other countries, these stakeholders are holders of knowledge and practices and care for the entire planet and the most strategic territories for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity. And in this regard, Colombia urges parties to, at COP17, not just confirm the consensus which we agreed upon at Subsidy 27, 28, and SBI 6 in this regard, but to move forwards more ambitiously in this within the context of negotiations on gender items under 8J for implementation of COP17 and recognition of the contributions of Afro-descendants in the implementation of this convention, which offers a valuable opportunity in order to continue consolidating the effective participation of the stakeholders. Therefore, Colombia invites parties at COP17 and the Secretariats to carry out a second international forum for Afro-descendants within the context of the COP, giving continuity to what we have voted and what my country voted at COP16 for their institutionalization as a permanent mechanism of dialogue, articulation, and capacity building which can contribute to effective and informed participation of these stakeholders within the context of the convention. Thank you very much, Chair.

Gracias a Colombia.

Thank you, Colombia.

Thank you, dear colleagues. I now close agenda item 9. Item 9 is closed. Now let's move to the next item, adoption of the report. We now come to document SubStar/28/L1, which is the draft report of the 28th meeting of SubStar. The document was made available, and I hope that all of you had a chance to read it. Before I invite the reporter, the rapporteur, to introduce the document, I would like to give the floor to the Secretariat to make an editorial correction. Secretariat, you have the floor.

Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Chair. An edit should be made at the end of paragraph 13 of the draft report to replace the words, the scenario note prepared by the Secretariat, with the words, open quote, the scenario note prepared by the Bureau with the support of the Secretariat, close quote. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Secretariat. Before I give the floor to Rapporteur, I give the floor to Argentina. Argentina, you have the floor.

Muchas gracias, señor Presidente.

Thank you very much, Chair. Argentina would like to make a statement. Argentina expresses its historic position on the Convention. which interprets it differently from other conventions which are not part of the convention. We express that the term gender, as set out in Article 7 of the ICC, doesn't have an equivalent term under the KMGBF. Adopting recommendations of the current meeting does not apply in its territory. Argentina asked for this to be included in a report of the meeting.

Thank you.

and we'll submit it in writing. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Argentina. Now I give the floor to rapporteur Niklaus of Switzerland— Switzerland, sorry— to introduce the document.

Thank you, Chair. Document Substa/28/8 L1 is a procedural report and as such summarizes the proceedings of the meeting, including listing the parties and observers who made statements during the meeting.

I have examined the report and found it to be accurate. I'm submitting it for adoption with understanding that today's proceedings and approved changes will be incorporated in the final report. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Niklaus. I propose that we review the report item by item. Please remember that the agenda items 1 through 9 have been closed and no changes can be made at this stage apart from corrections of factual errors. Any comment on item 1? Item 2? I see none. Let's continue. The Secretariat, in consultation Thank you for your patience, and let's continue. I, I would like to repeat, any comment on item 1?

No.

I see none. Any comment, item 2? Any comment, item 3? Any comment, item 4? Any comment, item 5? Any comment, item 6? Any comment on item 7? Any comment on item 8? Any comment on item 9? Any comment on item 10? Any comment on item 11? Thank you, colleagues. Now I give the— I give the floor to Secretariat. Secretariat, in consultation with the Chair and the Rapporteur, will incorporate all the changes approved by the Plenary. I therefore request the meeting to adopt the document with this understanding. Thank you, colleagues. As usual, the consolidated report will be reviewed by the rapporteur for clearance before it is released. We have completed agenda item 10, adoption of the report. Now I see that we have a I see Armenia. Armenia, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. Armenia would like to express its appreciation to you, Chair, for your excellent handling of the whole session of SAPSTA 28. We also thank the Bureau, the Secretariat, and the co-chairs for the dedication and hard work throughout SAPSTA 28. The progress achieved is reflective of parties' strong commitment to a meaningful process in the spirit of compromise and consensus. All agenda items showed a very good level of progress, providing a solid foundation for a successful outcome at COP17 in Yerevan. It was particularly welcoming to see the progress on the Global Review Decision. We hope that the good compromise and the delicate balance achieved within the draft Global Review Decision at SAPSTA 28 will set the tone for negotiations on the second part of the same decision at SBI 7, with the understanding that the clean text from Sub-State 28 recommendation will go straight to Yerevan. Armenia, as the incoming presidency of COP17, welcomes the parties' constructive engagement and good faith negotiations throughout this session and encourages to preserve and transmit that spirit of cooperation, flexibility, and mutual respect to SBI 7. Once again, thank you everyone for the excellent effort this week, and we look forward to welcoming all in Armenia in October to jointly celebrate the COP17 deliverables. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Thank you, Armenia. Now I recognize European Union. European Union, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair, and we would like to make a statement on behalf of the European Union and its member states. Is it the time now to make such a statement?

You will have the possibility of doing so if you'll let me just continue at present. present. So save time now, but then you'll have the possibility to do so. Thank you for your understanding.

Now let's move to the next item, item 11, closure of the meeting. We now move to item 11, closure of the meeting. I have pleasure to invite Ms. Astrid Schumacher, Executive Secretary, to address the meeting. You have the floor, Ms. Schumacher.

Chair, thank you. Delegates, you've had very long days, so let me try and be brief, pour gagner le temps, as the President has often reminded us. SAFSTAR 28 is about to close and I would say thanks to your dedication, discipline, and stamina, we have made it through a packed agenda once again. So your willingness to embrace the early statement submission modality, we believe, has made a difference, as has the constructive spirit with which you have collectively demonstrated that you want to advance all throughout the past days here. So earlier today, all delegates have received a link to a survey on their experiences with the modalities for the early submission of statements. Please, I know we've asked already a lot of you, but please take a few moments to share your feedback to help us to continue improve efficiency. Together, we have taken here an important step forward towards a successful COP17, as the incoming presidency has already reminded us. When we came to Nairobi, we knew that our task was to develop recommendations that would support accelerated implementation of the Global Biodiversity Framework and, of course, inform the work of COP17. I believe that you have achieved this objective. You have developed recommendations on a range of important matters, amongst them, of course, the Global Review of Collective Progress, providing a strong basis for further discussions in Yerevan. We all know the clock is ticking and COP17 must be the moment reunite, step up, and speed up to maintain our chance to win the race to halt and reverse biodiversity loss. And now I have some thanking to do, so please bear with me. First of all, my heartfelt gratitude goes to the United Nations Environment Programme for hosting us here in Nairobi, adding to our motivation by allowing us to see some biodiversity up close throughout the week, and for the excellent support provided throughout the meeting. The colleagues are even here to witness our last meeting. Thank you also to our interpreters and translators for their professionalism and dedication, to the United Nations Department of Safety and Security for looking after us, to our Chair for guiding our work throughout this intensive week, to the co-chairs of the various contact groups for their tireless efforts to bridge differences and and build consensus. And once again, to all of you for your commitment, patience, and perseverance. A big thank you also to the staff of UNON who took care of us, and to my colleagues of the Secretariat who once again defied sleep deprivation by burning the midnight oil long after evening contact groups had closed. Thank you so much, colleagues. And a special word of appreciation goes to the representatives of Indigenous peoples and local communities, as well as the representatives of women, youth, and other stakeholders whose perspectives reminded us throughout the week that implementing the Kunming-Montréal Global Biodiversity Framework requires inclusive approaches, diverse knowledge systems, and meaningful partnerships. Distinguished delegates, the baton now goes to SBI to take us forward on the path to Yerevan. May the spirit of SAPSTAR guide its deliberations. I'm sure I'm joined by the Chair of SBI in this wish. So, to those of you staying in Nairobi for SBI 7, I wish you a restful Sunday, and we look forward to continuing our work together next week. To those leaving Kenya— safari nyema— We look forward to seeing you all soon again. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Schumacher, for your closing remarks. Dear colleagues, I would like to open the floor for closing statements. I ask the region to keep their statements to a maximum Maximum of two minutes. I give the floor to Senegal, followed by European Union. Senegal, you have the floor. Vous avez la parole.

Thank you, Chair. Mr. Chair. At the beginning of our meeting, you defined the rules of the game, and I think that as a region we have 4 minutes, so I will ask for your indulgence because that was what we prepared for. Mr. Chair, I have the honour of speaking on behalf of the Africa region. At the end of this COP28, the Africa Group would like to express its deep gratitude to you for your exemplary leadership and your constant commitment. We also thank the Bureau, the chairs, the co-chairs of the Contact Group, the Secretariat, the interpreters, and the government and people of Kenya for their warm hospitality here in Nairobi. Mr. Chair, the global assessments that we have Inviting us to look at things clearly because collectively we are not yet on the path to achieve the 2030 goals or the objectives of the coming Montreal Biodiversity Framework, nor the 2050 vision of living together in harmony with nature. This reality should strengthen our collective determination in the lead-up to COP17 in Armenia. Mr. Chair, for Africa, biodiversity is not just an environmental priority. It is the basis of our economies, our livelihoods, our food security, and our sustainable development. We look forward I look forward to balanced decisions based on science that will be applicable to protected areas in the Action Plan on Synthetic Biology and under other items of the agenda as well, for the well-being of conservation and the aspirations for sustainable development of our populations. Mr. Chair, Ambitions alone are not enough. Accelerating the implementation means having the necessary means— appropriate financial resources that are predictable and accessible, scientific and technical cooperation that has been strengthened, technology transfer according to agreed-upon modalities, access to appropriate technology, and intensified capacity transfer. These are the crucial preconditions for developing countries to make their global commitments into concrete national actions. Mr. Chair, Africa also recalls the essential mandate of SABSTA. Namely, providing the COP with scientific, technical, and technologically rigorous advice. Thus, the debate and multilateralism are key. We encourage all parties to continue working in a spirit of collaboration, flexibility, and mutual trust. so that we can send to the COP mature, solid recommendations that will benefit the effectiveness of Substa. Mr. Chair, Africa expresses its sincere gratitude to the Commission of the African Union, UNEP, WWF, AWF, the African Development Bank, and all of our partners partners for their precious support, which allowed us to participate effectively in the Substa.

Merci.

Thank you, Senegal. I now give the floor to the European Union. European Union, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. Chair, distinguished colleagues, I'm speaking on behalf of the European Union and its member states. Firstly, we thank you, Chair, for effectively presiding over this meeting. We also thank the co-chairs, the Secretariat, parties, and observers. We thank the Bureau members, especially those who are outgoing, and congratulate the incoming members. We thank the interpreters, translators, and the support staff without whom this meeting would not have been possible. Finally, we thank UNEP for hosting this meeting and the kind people of Kenya for their hospitality throughout this week. SAPSTA, as the subsidiary body on scientific, technical, and technological advice, has provided a recommendation making great progress that will underpin a successful and sound outcome of the global review of implementation of the Kumming-Montréal Global Biodiversity Framework. The extensive engagement on this item has shown the great importance we attach— we all attach to making this first global review a successful and meaningful one. This is a unique opportunity for reaffirming the collective political will, ambition, and commitment to accelerate the implementation of the Framework. Enhanced implementation of the Programme of Work on Protected Areas aligned with the Framework and, in particular, the update of that Programme with complementary activities are also of great importance for the European Union and its Member States. Similarly, we look forward to the adoption of the Guidance on Sustainable Wildlife Management management, and the benefits that guidance will bring. It is unfortunate that the lack of transparency over procedural issues has distracted the work on the draft decisions on both items. Regarding marine and coastal biodiversity, the BBNJ agreement provides an excellent opportunity to substantially contribute to meeting the targets of the Framework. A strong cooperation and synergies between the CBD and the BBNJ agreement should be sought and implemented. We appreciate the complex discussions that have taken place on synthetic biology. The thematic plan— action plan for capacity building has found broad support. A range of options for further work remains on the table, and we are confident that a solution will be found at the upcoming coming COP in Yerevan. For SAPSTA, the assessment of best available science and knowledge as provided by IPBES is essential to deliver relevant advice to the COP. IPBES is a key partner, and close SAPSTA-IPBES cooperation is crucial. We take this opportunity to acknowledge the outstanding work of IPBES. In particular, we welcome the recent Business and biodiversity assessment and recognize its importance for the implementation of the Framework. Dear colleagues, we have made good progress across agenda items this week, but we are also conscious that significant challenges remain to finalize all the draft decisions at COP17. Nevertheless, the EU and its Member States are confident that this can be achieved, and count on the commitment and constructive engagement of all parties to that end. We remain committed to working towards successful outcomes and look forward to meeting you all again in Armenia. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you, European Union. Now I give the floor to youth, followed by women and NGOs. Youth, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. This statement is being delivered on behalf of the Global Youth Biodiversity Network, which serves as the international coordinating platform for youth participation in the Convention on biological diversity. Dear delegates, as we close COP28, we must remind you that a whole-of-society approach goes hand in hand with human rights-based approach, recognizing the specific needs, rights, and contributions of indigenous peoples and local communities, women, and youth. We must not compromise norms in our policies and reflect the essence of Target 22, 2 in recognizing us as rights holders and key implementers. We want to express our deep gratitude to Norway and Australia as champions that recognize the relevance of our voices and this demand, and call on other parties to have the same courage to do so. We must further ensure that IPBES assessments will continue to guide a just and sustainable implementation of the framework. We must follow the evidence and call for stronger regulatory frameworks, mandatory disclosures, and impact assessments regarding business activities, ensuring that those actors that contribute most to biodiversity loss will be accountable for their harm. Synthetic biology should continue to apply anticipatory approaches, horizon scanning, and monitoring mechanisms to support the timely identification and assessment of emerging developments and their potential. Sustainable wildlife management must be further recognized as inseparable from human rights, indigenous knowledge, science-informed, and intergenerational equity. We encourage parties to deliver an effective implementation of the Global Guidance on Sustainable Wildlife Management management, ensuring strengthened capacities, adequate resources, and meaningful participation of rights holders. We also emphasize that an updated program of work on protected and conserved areas must explicitly recognize indigenous and traditional territories alongside protected areas and OECMs and embed intergenerational equity, human rights-based approaches and ecological connectivity to truly achieve the ambition of Target 3. With respect to the informal advisory group of marine biodiversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction, we remind parties of standard language that ensures diverse representation and perspectives, and that youth participation as experts in such groups adds value to to discussions. We remind parties to ensure full and effective participation at the national level on marine and coastal biodiversity, including BBNJ, to deliver Target 22.

Thank you, youth. Now I give the floor to women, followed by NGO— no, followed by indigenous people. Women, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. I'm speaking on behalf of the CBD Women's Caucus. As SubStar 28 comes to a close, the CBD Women's Caucus wishes to share one final reflection. Throughout these negotiations, we've been seeing a concerning trend of references to Indigenous people and local communities, women and youth being weakened, bracketed, or removed from the text, delegated to a footnote. These are not simply drafting choices. They have implications on how the Kunming-Montréal Global Biodiversity Framework will be implemented. The findings from the Global Report are quite clear that implementation of human rights-based approach, gender equality, the full, effective, equitable, inclusive, and gender-responsive participation and engagement of rights holders are weak and not in line with consideration within Section C, Target 22 and 23. Technical outcomes should strengthen, not diminish, the commitments already contained in the Global Biodiversity Framework. So as we look ahead to SBI 7 and COP17, we encourage parties to ensure that the implementation of the framework remains firmly rooted in its guiding principles. The meaningful recognition, participation, and leadership of Indigenous people and local communities, women, and youth are not optional. They are essential for delivering effective, equitable, and lasting biodiversity action.

Thank you.

Thank you, Yuman. Women. Now I give the floor to indigenous peoples and local communities.

The International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity makes this statement regarding the following items. On item 3, the IIFB reiterates the importance of Section C of the Kunming-Montréal Global Biodiversity Framework and welcomes the explicit reference to indigenous peoples and local communities, women, and youth in the recommendations. We affirm our roles, rights, and contributions to the implementation of the KMGBF, including in planning, monitoring, reporting, and review processes. We further emphasize the importance of community-based monitoring and the full and effective participation of indigenous peoples and local communities in tracking process towards the framework's goals and targets. On item 4, We call parties on the IPBES Business Biodiversity Assessment to promote its implementation, fully aligned with the Convention and the KMGBF by embedding a consistent rights-based approach, including free, prior, and informed consent, equitable participation, effective safeguards, and fair and equitable benefit sharing, data governance, while strengthening accountability across business relationships. On item 5, regarding synthetic biology, we urge parties to uphold the precautionary principle and respect the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities consistent with Article 8 and Article 26 of the Cartagena Protocol. FPIC, full participation, and culturally appropriate capacity building must be guaranteed. Item 6, the Global Guidance on Sustainable Wildlife Management, we urge parties to recognize and promote rights-based approaches, traditional knowledge, and customary governance in line with Article 8, Article 10, and Target 22. On Item 7, the program of work on protected areas must include indigenous and traditional territories as a distinct yet complementary pathway for for conservation in accordance with Target 3. We welcome the explicit recognition of indigenous peoples in voluntary isolation and the principles of non-contact, intangibility, and precaution. Access to justice requires effective grievance and redress mechanisms, and direct access to finance is critical for indigenous-led conservation. On item 8, Indigenous peoples and local communities' full and effective participation in marine and coastal decision-making is not optional. Our participation in the advisory group must be ensured in line with the BBNJ and KMGBF, which recognizes the contribution of Indigenous peoples and local communities within and beyond national jurisdiction. It is a structural requirement for legitimacy, effectiveness, and alignment alignment with the Kunming-Montréal Framework. Indigenous peoples are not other actors. We are rights holders who are still—

Thank you. Thank you, IPLC. Now I give the floor to NGO.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm from the Third World Network, a member of the CBD Alliance. We support the statements from indigenous peoples and local communities, women, and youth. The message in the Global Report is clear. Despite some welcome progress, we remain off track to achieve the goals and targets of the KMGBF. The provision of the means of implementation from developed developing countries is significantly below what is required. Colleagues, there is no ambition without equity. Parties must accelerate whole-of-government action, particularly on Targets 14 and 18, including through stronger fiscal, financial, and regulatory policies to align public and private activities and fiscal and financial flows with the KMGBF and eliminate harmful incentives in an equitable way. Additionally, there's a collective failure to address the other elephants in the room. Unless the main structural drivers of biodiversity destruction and impediments to implementation, such as sovereign debt burdens, austerity policies, and tax injustices, are addressed, transformative change is impossible. In the IPBES recommendation, we welcome stronger recognition that governments have a central central role in establishing policy, legal, and regulatory frameworks for business and finance. But the text still presents business action as separate from, rather than a product of, effective public policy and regulation. This must be corrected, or we will fail to deliver the systemic reforms needed to stop biodiversity-destructive activities, align financial systems with biodiversity and human rights, and hold businesses accountable. On synthetic biology, the rapid pace of developments warrants precautionary oversight and a clear-eyed separation of hype from reality. We must evaluate how synthetic biology may either undermine or contribute to the Convention and KMGBF targets through horizon-scanning monitoring and assessment. We call on Parties to establish an ARTEC to develop the appropriate methodologies to do so. strengthen work on synthetic biology in accordance with Articles 7 and 14. The thematic action plan must build capacities of developing countries to conduct independent assessments contributing to sovereign decision-making while not bearing the burden of liability and costs associated with adverse effects. This is where equity can meet precaution. Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you, NGO. Dear colleagues, I thank everyone once again. Now, if you allow me, I would like to provide my closing remarks. Distinguished delegates, as we come to the close of the 28th meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice, I would like to sincerely thank all delegations for your constructive engagement, commitment, and spirit of cooperation throughout this week. When we opened this meeting, I noted that our collective responsibility was to provide clear, scientifically sound, and practical advice to support the implementation of the coming Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework and to inform the work of the 17th meeting of the Conference of the Parties. I believe that through your dedication and hard work, we have made important progress toward that objective. Over the past week, we have addressed a broad range of issues central to implementation of the framework, advancing the global review of collective progress, protected areas, sustainable wildlife management, marine and coastal biodiversity, scientific biology, and the work of IBEZ. The recommendations we have developed will provide important scientific and technical advice for the discussion at SBI 7 and the decision to be considered at COP 17. The recommendation we have developed will provide an important scientific and technical foundation for the discussion at the 7th meeting of the CIBSE DRI body on implementation and for the decision to be considered at COP17. I would like to thank the co-chairs of the contact groups for their leadership and tireless effort in facilitating our work. My thanks also go to my colleagues in the SAPSAB Bureau for their guidance throughout the preparation of this meeting. I also wish to thank the Executive Secretary, Ms. Astrid Schumacher, and the Secretariat for their excellent preparation dedication and hard work before and throughout this meeting. I thank our interpreters, conference officers, and all the staff working beyond the scenes whose professionalism ensured the smooth conduct of our work. I also wish to thank Ms. Inge Andersen and our UNEP colleagues, and the Government of Kenya for hosting us here in Nairobi. Finally, I thank representatives of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, women, youth, partner organizations, and observers for enriching our discussions through their active participation and valuable contribution. Colleagues, the work of Sub-Star does not end here. The months ahead will be critical as we continue preparing for the 17th meeting of the Conference of the Parties. I encourage all parties to build on the progress achieved this week and continue working together to support the effective implementation of the coming Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. For those remaining in Nairobi for the 7th meeting of the subsidiary body on implementation, I wish you every success in the discussion ahead. To those traveling home, I wish you a safe journey. Thank you. Thank you, colleagues. The meeting is closed.