Protests midway into the climate change talks or Conference of Parties (COPs) have been standard practice at the talks for a long time. They are the means by which climate activists and affected community members make their voices heard. However, experiences in recent years indicate that things have changed as protests appear to have become more and more muffled as observed in the last three annual editions of the COP.
At COP26 in Glasgow, Scotland, more than 100,000 people marched through the streets of that city in 2021 despite the rain. However, protests in Sharm el-Sheikh (COP27) and Dubai (COP28) in 2022 and 2023 respectively had to remain within the venues of the COP.
At the recent 29th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP29) held at Baku in Azerbaijan, protests took place inside the venue for the third consecutive time at a COP.
There was no real march at COP29. Rather, a human chain was formed outside in the area between plenary rooms after protestors staged a rally inside a sizable plenary session. There, only finger-snapping and humming were permitted instead of the usual chanting.
In order to avoid interfering with the UN-led COP negotiations, singing and chanting are prohibited near the negotiating chambers. Along with not mentioning any nations or using flags, these are rules set forth by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and United Nations (UN) Department of Security and Safety.
According to the campaigners, the UNFCCC team told them that the layout of the recent COP made it impossible to stage a march, and that the only alternative was to go through the stadium, which they declined because it would have reduced the visibility of their activity. There were narrow hallways between the halls, and a march might have made it impossible for people to move freely, the organisers indicated.
Nnimmo Bassey of Health of Mother Earth Foundation (HOMEF) based in Nigeria can be described as a COP veteran. Speaking on his experience at the COP29 ‘protest’, he said: “The Global Day of Action (protest) is an annual ritual at the COP. I have attended many COPs, and in the past it usually saw citizens and delegates march through the streets of the city hosting the COP, airing their views, protesting against climate inaction and also offering solutions. There were platforms at certain street locations where people gathered and made real speeches.”
He noted that for three years running, action at COP has been consistently and increasingly restricted. “At COP27 at Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, the march was within the COP venue. There was no interaction with the public, no interaction with the delegates. At the COP28 at Dubai, the same thing was repeated. The march was even of a lesser scope.
“Now at COP29, there was literarily no march at all. It was just a chain of hands, with people moving within the corridors. There was nothing done outside the premises. Everything was totally contained within the walls of the COP venue. There were no loud sounds; everyone was murmuring, snapping their fingers. Everything was so restricted.”
The climate activist lamented saying, “The whole idea of protests is being lost. The idea of having dissenting voices against climate inaction, against lethargy by nations is being lost. Perhaps because there’s less freedom in the world today and it is being brought into the COP venue. It is like the official don’t want to hear from us again. It is a very sad day!”
He added, “There may come a time in future where no protests will be allowed at all. It diminishes the idea of justice within the system.”
Giving her opinion, another climate activist, Ivonne Yanez, Oilwatch International, recalled: “In Sharm El-Sheikh, it was forbidden to have the people’s summit or to protest outside, or even inside.”
Speaking on her experience at the Global Day of Action at COP29, she said: “What we had today was a silent demonstration. It was forbidden to make political demands or environmental demands. What we did was just display our placards and hum.
“We were asking why is this? First, I think they are afraid. When I say they, I mean the negotiators and the corporations together. I think they are afraid of what the people would say. The voice of the people is very powerful and very symbolic. They know that we are angry: they know that we understand that they are trying to hoodwink us. We know that they want to continue to deepen carbon markets and all that violates human rights and nature rights.”
She added, “Their action is very strange, but this will not deter us from continuing to monitor what is happening at the COPs.”
In his submission of the state of protests at the COP, especially his experience at the Baku talks, Olamide Ogunlade of Corporate Accountability and Public Participation Africa (CAPPA), said: “I think COP29 was a very exclusive COP. Certain things characterised the last COP: Expressions of frontline communities and dissenting voices from civil society organizations across the global south were reduced. Unlike previous COPs where we could make open protests and express our displeasure about ongoing negotiations and our general feelings, the last COP29 in Baku was very suppressive. People could not have what they call free protests. We were confined.”
Explaining further, he said, “One person had to speak on behalf of the majority. That meant no matter how serious your issues are, that person had to combine those issues and try to speak on behalf of the collective.
“So it doesn’t allow what we call freedom of expression, as we would have wanted. We’ve always said that COPs have been reduced to a marketplace. It’s like the gathering of the big boys, trying to make profits for themselves. So that’s one.
“Secondly, we also saw large infiltrations of carbon profiteers, these are lobbyists, as we normally call them. About 1,700 plus of them attended the last COP, and they were not there for the fun of it. They were there to strike deals. They were there to derail conversations that will further enrich them and further impoverish those in the frontline communities. So we had lobbyists in their numbers, I think much more than the previous COP28.”
According to him, the lobbyists “had free access to whatever conversations that you think should be the exclusive preserve of state actors. But these carbon profiteers put in their opinions and shape conversations for their interest. That to us is something that we should worry about.”
‘Continuation of old wrongs’
Ogunlade said that COP29 witnessed a continuation of the old wrongs. “Nothing changed. More commitments were rather made for carbon finance and not climate finance.”
He explained, “We have always said that the Global South needs climate finance and not carbon finance. But there is a very careful attempt to misplace climate finance, you know, with carbon finance.
“When you see carbon profiteers and lobbyists advancing interest in carbon sequestration, direct air capture, net zero and all that, and they call it climate finance. That is a little bit confusing and ‘misconfusing’ as well, if I may use that word.”
Ogunlade said that the 300 billion dollars pledge agreed on at the end of COP29, will go into carbon finance and not climate finance. “And that is a very big blow on the African continent and even on the Global South as a whole.”
He added, “We are also worried about the inefficiency of the African group of negotiators to even speak for the continent. You know, the African Group of Negotiators (AGN) speaks for African continent. No matter how serious your climate crisis or devastations are, you don’t have access to the mic as a country within Africa. You speak through the African group of negotiators, but then when you see how loudly silent the AGN was in the last COP, you begin to have this worry as an African.”
and then