by Debbie Coffey at ppjg.me
March 14, 2012 by onephoenix
Copyright 2012 All Rights Reserved.____________________________________________________________The Draft International Covenant on Environment and Development is Agenda 21 on steroids. If you take the word “Environment” out of the title (which seems to be thrown in to placate you), and call this the International Covenant on Development, you will more clearly see the intent of this manifesto.
The Covenant is intended to become a binding Global Treaty and the template for international law. International attorneys have been hammering this out for about 16 years. The 4th draft was issued in 2010.
The Covenant is about control of development, and social engineering, by the United Nations. Remember, the United Nations is a trade organization funded by money from corporations, organizations and associations funded by corporations, and foreign governments.
The Covenant states it focuses on “social and economic pillars.”
In the Covenant’s footnotes, it refers to the constitutions of Brazil, India, Namibia, and even the Islamic Republic of Iran. But this manifesto doesn’t adhere to the U.S. Constitution. If the Covenant is adapted by the United States, it will be the end of our Constitution and our rights.
The Covenant has 79 Articles.
The Covenant claims control of “areas beyond national jurisdiction, high seas and outer space.” (Article 3) The stated reasoning for this declaration of control of everything is because the global environment is a “common concern.”
The Covenant demands laws and regulations that “integrate” international law for ALL forms of physical planning. (Article 41) This includes town and country planning, ALL infrastructure (including highways, railways, waterways, dams, harbors, etc.), aquifers, drainage basins, coastal and marine areas and “any other areas constituting biological units.” It covers allocation of municipal, agricultural, grazing, forestry and other uses. It even “encourages” parties to limit their subsidization of private enterprises, including agricultural subsidies.
The Covenant covers everything.In Article 34, “TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT,” (the operative word being trade), “sets out the duty to cooperate and establish and maintain an international economic system” with global rules of trade. The Covenant defines “duty” as a legal obligation. What do you think an “international economic system” is?
The Covenant is issued by the IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) and the ICEL (International Council on Environmental Law).
The IUCNAgenda 21, the United Nations action plan, is cited throughout the Covenant. Agenda 21’s OBJECTIVE is communally and collectively owned and managed land. This is communism.
On the IUCN website, it states: “IUCN links its Mission to the paramount goals of the international community on environment and sustainable development, in particular Agenda 21…”
U.S. agencies that are members of IUCN are: U.S. Departments of State, Commerce, Agriculture (Forest Service), the Interior (Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Park Service) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). These agencies are also on the White House Rural Council.
1) The Covenant is to remain a “living document” until it is adapted. (A “living document” can change at any time.)
2) The Covenant is intended to be a MINIMUM set of obligations.(Article 64)
3) The Covenant states “No reservations may be made to this covenant.”
(Article 76) (This means you can’t opt out of anything.)
4) The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall be the Depository of this treaty (Article 78) (So who do you think will be running this show?)
Also in the Covenant:Article 11 – This is about eradication of poverty. Sounds nice, but when this document, or Agenda 21 (which it cites) brings up “equity” or directing social and economic needs in an “equitable manner,” this is communism.
Article 16 – This is about consumption and production patterns (think Smart Meters being installed on your homes and offices) and the “importance and power” of multilateral development banks and “regional” economic integration organizations. This ties into Article 28, which requires surveillance (again, think Smart Meters being installed on your homes and offices), and management of processes and activities, but as of yet, “no specific rules to identify or evaluate” this. (Hold your breath for the 5th Draft.)
Article 29 – Is about “harmonization” and anything that can “help eliminate non-tariff barriers to trade.”
Article 30 (p.99) – Humans are defined as “organisms,” and as if this weren’t funny enough, it is followed by “Control” should “involve limiting the increase in numbers and spread of the organism by appropriate elimination, removal or other measures.”
Article 33 – This is about providing for long term resettlement and estimating the “carrying capacity” of the environment.
Article 36 – This is about Military and Hostile Activities. (Does the US have to ask permission from the UN to declare war?)
Article 39 – This is about management plans for harvestable transboundary biological resources, which would establish quotas and seasons for permissible taking. (Who gives this permission?)
Part VIII. – IMPLEMENTATION AND COOPERATION – stresses the importance of implementation of ALL obligations of the Covenant and the principal of general international law, including procedural obligations.
These “procedural obligations” are:
Article 67 – Parties submit periodic reports to the Secretary-General of the United Nations on the measures they have adopted, progress made, and difficulties encountered in implementing their obligations under this Covenant.
(Like from pesky Americans who fight for their Constitution.)
Article 69 – Settlement of disputes – to be submitted to either an arbitral tribunal, including the Permanent Court of Arbitration, or to judicial settlement, including the International Court of Justice and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.
Article 70 – Review Conference. Secretary-General of the UN convenes a conference every 5 years to review implementation of the Covenant.
Article 71 – If you want to amend any part of this Covenant, you have to submit it to the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
(What about our Congress? Will there be anything left for them to do? Will they lose their jobs?)
Article 43 – This obligates parties to cooperate in the formulation of international rules and standards, which is called “harmonization.”
Article 48 – This is about biotechnology, and requires sharing the “benefits,” defined as research and development results, royalties, access and transfer of technologies.
Article 63 – Parties are encouraged to become parties of treaties furthering the objective of this Covenant. (This means the UN is going to shove the Covenant down your throats one way or another.)
Who wrote the Covenant?
The Covenant was launched at the UN Congress on Public International Law in 1995. The Second Edition was presented to UN Member States at the 54th UN General Assembly. The Third Edition was presented to UN Member states at the 59th UN General Assembly. The 4th Edition (this one) was presented to UN member states at the 65th UN General Assembly.
The United States of America is a UN Member State.
Contributors to (writers of) the Covenant include the “Secretariat,” many international lawyers and U.S. professors from: Cornell University, Princeton, Pace University, Middlebury College, George Washington University Law School, Bucknell University, University of Indiana, University of Wisconsin – Stevens Point, Meadville Theological School, and University of the Pacific.
Also, Daniel B. Magraw, who was Assoc. General Council for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In 2006, Mr. McGraw was listed as President and CEO of the Center for Environmental Law (one of the organizations issuing this Covenant), as a past Director of the International Law Office of the EPA (1992-2001), as Director of Lightbridge Corp., a provider of nuclear energy, and as a new member of the Board of Directors of Thorium Power, a nuclear energy company.
Other contributors were Nicholas Yost of the big international law firm Sonnenshein, Nath & Rosenthal (which represents WalMart, Sears, and Sony, to name a few), the Hastings Center and Arthur Westing of Westing Associates in Environment, Security and Education.
Since these contributors are professors and lawyers, you’d assume they’ve read our Constitution and might’ve noticed how the Covenant conflicts with our Constitution and our rights.
After 4 drafts, all of the words and ideas in the Covenant have been very carefully crafted. The words “must” and “shall” are directives. The Covenant uses terms like exclusive economic zones, buffer zones, interconnected corridors, and the word regional. Pay attention to the words region, regionalism and ecoregion. Regionalism is one way Agenda 21 is already being implemented in this country. Regionalism separates you from city, county and state government, where you (for now) still have a voice in your government.
RIO + 20
In June 2012, there will be a United Nations Conference called Rio + 20. We must make sure our government doesn’t become a party to, or “partner” or participate in any way, with the implementation of the Draft Environmental Covenant on Environment and Development.
Authors note: Many thanks to excellent researcher/writer Nicole Johnson for bringing the Draft International Covenant on Environment and Development to our attention.
Please help support PPJ!
To learn more:
www.democratsagainstunagenda21.org www.morphcity.com the PPJ Gazette
The Covenant: http://www.uncsd2012.org/rio20/index.php?page=view&type=400&nr=83&menu=45
Agenda 21: http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/