May, 01 2017, 11:15am EDT
New Report: Big Polluters Have Backdoor Access to UNFCCC
Study exposes trade associations currently admitted to talks have long track records of undermining climate action
BOSTON
Today, Corporate Accountability International released a new report"Inside Job: Big Polluters' lobbyists on the inside at the UNFCCC," exposing the dirty fossil fuel trade associations that are stalking the halls of the U.N. climate talks to undermine, weaken, and block progress.
The report release comes just one week before governments convene in Bonn, Germany to continue negotiations on the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Governments will, for the first time in history, officially discuss conflicts of interest at this convening. The meetings in Bonn will also be the first for the U.S.' Trump administration, whose State Department is now led by former Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson. This has further raised the specter of conflicts of interest in government and at the talks.
"Right now hundreds of business trade associations have access to the climate talks, and many of them are funded by some of the world's biggest polluters and climate change deniers," said International Policy Director Tamar Lawrence-Samuel with Corporate Accountability International. "With so many arsonists in the fire department, it's no wonder we've failed to put the fire out."
The report peels back the curtain on just six of the more than 270 Business/Industry NGOs non-governmental organizations (BINGOs) currently admitted to the climate talks: U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Mining Association, Business Roundtable, FuelsEurope, Business Council of Australia, and International Chamber of Commerce.
Many of these groups were exposed for their myriad fossil fuel industry connections in an analysis produced by Corporate Accountability Internationalprior to the Marrakech climate talks in 2016. This report expands on that body of evidence, uncovering not just the BINGOs' connections to the fossil fuel industry, but also the actions these groups have taken themselves to weaken, slow, or block climate policy, exposing their duplicity at the talks.
The report and discussion in Bonn build on the Kick Big Polluters Out campaign--a years-long movement of civil society groups and hundreds of thousands of people across the world demanding climate policy be protected from fossil fuel industry interference. Currently, there are no policies in place to protect against organizations intent on derailing the process, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Business Council of Australia.
Recently, the campaign has coalesced around a movement of governments representing nearly 70 percent of the world's population that, last May in Bonn, called for the UNFCCC to address conflicts of interest. The proposal was met with fervent opposition from some of the world's biggest historical emitters, including the United States, European Union, and Australia. And at the Marrakech talks in November, environmental groups confronted the U.S. delegation and delivered the call to kick big polluters out of the talks from more than half a million people, with an additional 75,000 calling for the U.S. delegation to support the policy or step aside.
Governments are looking to the precedent set in the global tobacco treaty. Both its key provision, Article 5.3, and the guidelines for implementation of Article 5.3protect against classic industry interference tactics by barring partnerships, financial relationships, revolving door cases, and industry participation in the policymaking process. These provisions have been recognized by World Health Organization Director-General Margaret Chan as the single largest catalyst of progress in a treaty that could save 200 million lives by 2050 when fully implemented.
The conflict of interest discussion will take place at Bonn during an in-session workshop on enhancing the participation of observer organizations, organized by the UNFCCC secretariat.
###
Key findings and recommendations:
The main takeaway: Under current UNFCCC rules, numerous BINGOs that represent the financial interests of Big Oil, Gas, and Coal have been granted access to the negotiations. These six BINGOs represent just the tip of the iceberg.
Findings from "Inside Job":
1) Big Oil's Yes-man: U.S. Chamber of Commerce
a. Funded by Exxon Mobil, Chevron, and Peabody Energy.
b. Lobbied against greenhouse gas emissions reductions.
c. Priorities for 2017 include increasing fossil fuel production and opposing any attempts to regulate greenhouse gas under the Clean Air Act.
d. Uses legal attacks to intimidate policymakers.
e. Promotes misleading "research" to undermine climate policy.
2) Big Coal's Chief Denier: National Mining Association
a. Represents Peabody Energy, Arch Coal, GE Mining, and the American Coal Council.
b. Has spoken out against the Paris Agreement.
c. Sued to stop the Clean Power Plan.
d. Campaigns for coal production.
3) Big Businesses' Big Bully: Business Roundtable
a. Represents the CEOs of Shell, Chevron, Exxon Mobil, ConocoPhillips, Duke Energy, Phillips 66, Marathon Oil Company, Marathon Petroleum Company, and Peabody Energy.
b. Lobbies to open U.S. federal lands for drilling, mining, and fracking.
c. Relentlessly opposed the Clean Power Plan, clean water, and air rules.
d. Supports controversial and dangerous oil pipelines.
4) Europe's Fossil Fuel Apologist: FuelsEurope
a. Members include BP, Exxon Mobil, Shell, Total, Lukoil, and Varo Energy.
b. Opposed European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (conservative, market-based false solution) and greenhouse gas targets.
c. Says the European Union is already doing its fair share and any additional action would be "irrelevant in the global balance," ignoring its historical responsibility.
5) Australia's Fossil Fuel Front: Business Council of Australia
a. Members include BHP Billiton, BP, Chevron, Exxon Mobil, Shell, and Rio Tinto.
b. Business Council of Australia's president is on BHP Billiton's board.
c. Opposed Australia's carbon tax.
d. Its members are at the center of the controversial Great Australian Bight drill plans.
6) The Corporate Door-Opener: International Chamber of Commerce
a. The corporate ringleader of the UNFCCC: It makes sure all doors are open and all access is granted to corporations and trade associations.
b. Access, access, access: The International Chamber of Commerce is the corporate skeleton key.
c. Makes veiled ultimatums about business access: "If the Paris Agreement doesn't work with and for business, then it just won't work."
d. Supports weak, voluntary (non-mandatory) action.
Recommendations of the report: The report makes two overarching recommendations to governments:
- Formally reach a consensus on a universal definition of a conflict of interest: The UNFCCC should adopt the following definition: "A conflict of interest may arise when activities, relationships, or situations place a public institution and/or an individual that represents it in a real, potential, or perceived conflict between its duties or responsibilities to the public and personal, institutional, or other interests. These other interests include but are not limited to business, commercial, or financial interests pertaining to the institution and/or the individual. A conflict of interest, therefore, could be financial in nature or could simply point to diverging interests that may undermine policy objectives or outcomes."
- Create a stringent, transparent process for admission: The UNFCCC should look to the abundance of established best practices that are already embodied in similar legislation around the world and put in place a stringent, transparent process for admission of UNFCCC observers. This process must be rigorous enough to ensure that those allowed to participate in the UNFCCC negotiations are motivated by the sole interest of protecting people and the planet, not private interests or what's good for business.
Corporate Accountability stops transnational corporations from devastating democracy, trampling human rights, and destroying our planet.
(617) 695-2525LATEST NEWS
National Team Member Becomes at Least 265th Palestinian Footballer Killed by Israel in Gaza
Muhannad al-Lili's killing by Israeli airstrike came as the world mourned the death of Portugal and Liverpool star Diogo Jota and his brother André Silva in a car crash in Spain.
Jul 04, 2025
Muhannad Fadl al-Lili, captain of the Al-Maghazi Services Club and a member of Palestine's national football team, died Thursday from injuries suffered during an Israeli airstrike on his family home in the central Gaza Strip earlier this week, making him the latest of hundreds of Palestinian athletes killed since the start of Israel's genocidal onslaught.
Al-Maghazi Services Club announced al-Lili's death in a Facebook tribute offering condolences to "his family, relatives, friends, and colleagues" and asking "Allah to shower him with his mercy."
The Palestine Football Association (PFA) said that "on Monday, a drone fired a missile at Muhannad's room on the third floor of his house, which led to severe bleeding in the skull."
"During the war of extermination against our people, Muhannad tried to travel outside Gaza to catch up with his wife, who left the strip for Norway on a work mission before the outbreak of the war," the association added. "But he failed to do so, and was deprived of seeing his eldest son, who was born outside the Gaza Strip."
According to the PFA, al-Lili is at least the 265th Palestinian footballer and 585th athlete to be killed by Israeli forces since they launched their assault and siege on Gaza following the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel. Sports journalist Leyla Hamed says 439 Palestinian footballers have been killed by Israel.
Overall, Israel's war—which is the subject of an International Court of Justice (ICJ) genocide case—has left more than 206,000 Palestinians dead, maimed, or missing, and around 2 million more forcibly displaced, starved, or sickened, according to Gaza officials.
The Palestine Chronicle contrasted the worldwide press coverage of the car crash deaths of Portuguese footballer Diogo Jota and his brother André Silva with the media's relative silence following al-Lili's killing.
"Jota's death was a tragedy that touched millions," the outlet wrote. "Yet the death of Muhannad al-Lili... was met with near-total silence from global sports media."
Last week, a group of legal experts including two United Nations special rapporteurs appealed to the Fédération Internationale de Football Association, the world football governing body, demanding that its Governance Audit and Compliance Committee take action against the Israel Football Association for violating FIFA rules by playing matches on occupied Palestinian territory.
In July 2024, the ICJ found that Israel's then-57-year occupation of Palestine—including Gaza—is an illegal form of apartheid that should be ended as soon as possible.
During their invasion and occupation of Gaza, Israeli forces have also used sporting facilities including Yarmouk Stadium for the detention of Palestinian men, women, and children—many of whom have reported torture and other abuse at the hands of their captors.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Highly Inspiring' Court Ruling Affirms Nations' Legal Duty to Combat Climate Emergency
"While the United States and some other major polluters have chosen to ignore climate science, the rest of the international community is advancing protections," said one observer.
Jul 04, 2025
In a landmark advisory opinion published Thursday, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights—of which the United States, the world's second-biggest carbon polluter, is not a member—affirmed the right to a stable climate and underscored nations' duty to act to protect it and address the worsening planetary emergency.
"States must refrain from any conduct that reverses, slows down, or truncates the outcome of measures necessary to protect human rights in the face of the impacts of climate change," a summary of the 234-page ruling states. "Any rollback of climate or environmental policies that affect human rights must be exceptional, duly justified based on objective criteria, and comply with standards of necessity and proportionality."
"The court also held that... states must take all necessary measures to reduce the risks arising, on the one hand, from the degradation of the global climate system and, on the other, from exposure and vulnerability to the effects of such degradation," the summary adds.
"States must refrain from any conduct that reverses, slows down, or truncates the outcome of measures necessary to protect human rights in the face of the impacts of climate change."
The case was brought before the Costa-Rica based IACtHR by Chile and Colombia, both of which "face the daily challenge of dealing with the consequences of the climate emergency, including the proliferation of droughts, floods, landslides, and fires, among others."
"These phenomena highlight the need to respond urgently and based on the principles of equity, justice, cooperation, and sustainability, with a human rights-based approach," the court asserted.
IACtHR President Judge Nancy Hernández López said following the ruling that "states must not only refrain from causing significant environmental damage but have the positive obligation to take measures to guarantee the protection, restoration, and regeneration of ecosystems."
"Causing massive and irreversible environmental harm...alters the conditions for a healthy life on Earth to such an extent that it creates consequences of existential proportions," she added. "Therefore, it demands universal and effective legal responses."
The advisory opinion builds on two landmark decisions last year. In April 2024, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the Swiss government violated senior citizens' human rights by refusing to abide by scientists' warnings to rapidly phase out fossil fuel production.
The following month, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea found in an advisory opinion that greenhouse gas emissions are marine pollution under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and that signatories to the accord "have the specific obligation to adopt laws and regulations to prevent, reduce, and control" them.
The IACtHR advisory opinion is expected to boost climate and human rights lawsuits throughout the Americas, and to impact talks ahead of November's United Nations Climate Change Conference, or COP30, in Belém, Brazil.
Climate defenders around the world hailed Thursday's advisory opinion, with United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk calling it "a landmark step forward for the region—and beyond."
"As the impact of climate change becomes ever more visible across the world, the court is clear: People have a right to a stable climate and a healthy environment," Türk added. "States have a bedrock obligation under international law not to take steps that cause irreversible climate and environmental damage, and they have a duty to act urgently to take the necessary measures to protect the lives and rights of everyone—both those alive now and the interests of future generations."
Amnesty International head of strategic litigation Mandi Mudarikwa said, "Today, the Inter-American Court affirmed and clarified the obligations of states to respect, ensure, prevent, and cooperate in order to realize human rights in the context of the climate crisis."
"Crucially, the court recognized the autonomous right to a healthy climate for both individuals and communities, linked to the right to a healthy environment," Mudarikwa added. "The court also underscored the obligation of states to protect cross-border climate-displaced persons, including through the issuance of humanitarian visas and protection from deportation."
Delta Merner, lead scientist at the Science Hub for Climate Litigation at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in a statement that "this opinion sets an important precedent affirming that governments have a legal duty to regulate corporate conduct that drives climate harm."
"Though the United States is not a party to the treaty governing the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, this opinion should be a clarion call for transnational fossil fuel companies that have deceived the public for decades about the risks of their products," Merner added. "The era of accountability is here."
Markus Gehring, a fellow and director of studies in law at Hughes Hall at the University of Cambridge in England, called the advisory opinion "highly inspiring" and "seminal."
Drew Caputo, vice president of litigation for lands, wildlife, and oceans at Earthjustice, said that "the Inter-American Court's ruling makes clear that climate change is an overriding threat to human rights in the world."
"Governments must act to cut carbon emissions drastically," Caputo stressed. "While the United States and some other major polluters have chosen to ignore climate science, the rest of the international community is advancing protections for all from the realities of climate harm."
Climate litigation is increasing globally in the wake of the 2015 Paris climate agreement. In the Americas, Indigenous peoples, children, and green groups are among those who have been seeking climate justice via litigation.
However, in the United States, instead of acknowledging the climate emergency, President Donald Trump has declared an "energy emergency" while pursuing a "drill, baby, drill" policy of fossil fuel extraction and expansion.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Admin Quietly Approves Massive Crude Oil Expansion Project
"This thinly analyzed decision threatens the lifeblood of the American Southwest," said one environmental attorney.
Jul 04, 2025
The Trump administration has quietly fast-tracked a massive oil expansion project that environmentalists and Democratic lawmakers warned could have a destructive impact on local communities and the climate.
As reported recently by the Oil and Gas Journal, the plan "involves expanding the Wildcat Loadout Facility, a key transfer point for moving Uinta basin crude oil to rail lines that transport it to refineries along the Gulf Coast."
The goal of the plan is to transfer an additional 70,000 barrels of oil per day from the Wildcat Loadout Facility, which is located in Utah, down to the Gulf Coast refineries via a route that runs along the Colorado River. Controversially, the Trump administration is also plowing ahead with the project by invoking emergency powers to address energy shortages despite the fact that the United States for the last couple of years has been producing record levels of domestic oil.
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) and Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) issued a joint statement condemning the Trump administration's push to approve the project while rushing through environmental impact reviews.
"The Bureau of Land Management's decision to fast-track the Wildcat Loadout expansion—a project that would transport an additional 70,000 barrels of crude oil on train tracks along the Colorado River—using emergency procedures is profoundly flawed," the Colorado Democrats said. "These procedures give the agency just 14 days to complete an environmental review—with no opportunity for public input or administrative appeal—despite the project's clear risks to Colorado. There is no credible energy emergency to justify bypassing public involvement and environmental safeguards. The United States is currently producing more oil and gas than any country in the world."
On Thursday, the Bureau of Land Management announced the completion of its accelerated environmental review of the project, drawing condemnation from climate advocates.
Wendy Park, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, described the administration's rush to approve the project as "pure hubris," especially given its "refusal to hear community concerns about oil spill risks." She added that "this fast-tracked review breezed past vital protections for clean air, public safety and endangered species."
Landon Newell, staff attorney for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, accused the Trump administration of manufacturing an energy emergency to justify plans that could have a dire impact on local habitats.
"This thinly analyzed decision threatens the lifeblood of the American Southwest by authorizing the transport of more than 1 billion gallons annually of additional oil on railcars traveling alongside the Colorado River," he said. "Any derailment and oil spill would have a devastating impact on the Colorado River and the communities and ecosystems that rely upon it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular