Suggestion 1: Strong new institutional structure[edit | edit source]
Establish a strong new institutional structure with substantive powers, including a scientific committee.
Cooperate with existing Scientific Committees of relevant Conventions e.g. CITES, CMS, for the conservation and monitoring of activities concerning endangered species specifically listed under those Conventions.
References: CBD Art 23, 24 25 (COP, Secretariat, SBSTA), CMS Art VII, VIII, IX (COP, Scientific Council, Secretariat), REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy art 43, 44 and 45 (Regional Advisory Councils), CITES Preamble, UN BBNJ Policy Brief Adjacency
Suggestion 2: Expand mandate of ISA to serve as basis of institutional structure[edit | edit source]
Expand mandate of the ISA and its constituent bodies so that:
- The ISA Legal and Technical Commission is expanded, or a parallel body established, to provide advisory functions to the decision-making body
This would normally imply the amendment of the UNCLOS under article 312.
Suggestion 3: Develop institutional structure based on Antarctic Treaty model and DOALOS[edit | edit source]
As under the Antarctic Treaty, the Parties of the I.A. could meet in a forum to exchange information, consult on matters of common interest and formulate recommendations addressing the I.A key elements (conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in ABNJ). In this forum, as under the Madrid Protocol to the Antarctic Treaty, a Committee for Environmental Protection could be established to provide advice and formulate recommendations for the Consultative Meeting.
Suggestion 4:[edit | edit source]