CITES能预防下一次大流行病吗?约翰·斯坎伦谈全球野生动物贸易法新视角

2020-05-25 09:56 来源:澎湃新闻·澎湃号·政务

字号
编者按:近日,联合国《濒危野生动植物种国际贸易公约》(CITES)前秘书长、非洲公园特使约翰·斯坎伦先生与中国绿发会的小伙伴们分享了他于5月18日在IUCN世界环境法委员会的网络研讨会上的精彩主题发言,就关于CITES的角色和建立预防下一次传染病大流行的长效机制的问题分享了观点。现将此文翻译、发布如下。

编者按/Linda 翻译/洪珮嘉 审/绿会反盗猎工作组 责编/Angel

IUCN Commission on Environmental Law
世界自然保护联盟世界环境法委员会(IUCN WCEL)
Webinar Series – 18 May 2020
网络会议 2020年5月18日


A fresh look at Global wildlife trade law: can CITES help prevent pandemics?
全球野生动物贸易法新视角:CITES能预防下一次大流行病吗?


Is CITES enough or do we need more?
除了CITES,我们还需要做更多吗?

John E Scanlon AO
约翰·斯坎伦


Thank you for that generous introduction Sheila and thank you also to the World Commission on Environmental Law, its Chair and Deputy Chair, for bringing us all together today.
感谢希拉的热情介绍,感谢IUCN世界环境法委员会,委员会主席、副主席,带领召开今天的会议。

The COVID-19 pandemic has reminded us in a devastating way of the interconnected nature of things, most particularly between economies, the environment, human and wildlife health and welfare. Our international laws, programmes and funds do not yet reflect this reality, which is also largely the case at the national level.
新冠肺炎疫情以残酷的方式提醒着我们,世间万物是紧密联系的,特别是各经济体、环境、人类和野生动物健康及福利之间是密不可分的。但是我们的国际法、国际项目和基金却并没有体现这一事实上的关联,在国家层面上亦然。

IUCN Commissions have been the drivers of innovation within the IUCN family, and now is a critical time for fresh thinking on what needs to be done to avert the next pandemic. This timely webinar is focused on the role of the law in achieving this objective.
IUCN各科学委员会一直是推动IUCN成员创新发展的主动力。现阶段十分关键,我们需要产生避免下一场大流行病的新思路。本次网络会议十分及时,会议重点是在避免下一场大流行病的过程中,法律所起的作用。

----

Colleagues, the most likely explanation for COVID-19 is that the virus jumped from bats to humans, perhaps via another animal such as a pangolin, at a wet market in Wuhan but no firm conclusions can yet be drawn.
各位,新冠病毒肺炎的来源可能是在武汉的一个wet market,病毒从蝙蝠转移到人身上,或是通过其他动物,比如通过一只穿山甲,转移到人身上,但是目前还没有任何证据表明这一猜想的真实性。

However, the links between wildlife and previous epidemics and pandemics are known, such as HIV-AIDS, Ebola, MERS, SARS and more, as is the advice of public health officials and scientists on the risk posed by wildlife-related zoonotic diseases, as well as the conditions that make spillover from animals to humans more likely.
不过,我们都知道过往的流行病和疫情都与野生动物有关,比如艾滋病、埃博拉、中东呼吸综合征、非典型性肺炎等等。公共健康人员和科学家也多次提及由野生动物引起的动物性疾病的威胁,以及预防建议。我们也了解在什么情况下病毒更容易从动物转移到人类身上。

The risks are real, and the stakes are high.
风险确切存在,代价十分高昂。

-----

The title of today’s webinar ‘Can CITES help prevent the next pandemic?’ is a tougher question than it appears at first sight. Given its existing mandate, CITES role in preventing the next pandemic is, to be frank, relatively limited in my view, and perhaps we also need to reverse the question and ask, ‘Could CITES trade expose us to the next pandemic?’
今天网络会议的题目是“CITES能帮助我们预防下一场大流行病吗?”,回答这一问题比人们想象的要困难。尽管CITES有管理野生动物贸易的职责,但是我认为CITES在预防大流行病方面的作用依然有限,或许我们应该问:“CITES管辖范围内的野生动物贸易会引起下一场大流行病吗?”

The answer to both questions requires an understanding of how CITES works and, having seen the participant list, perhaps not everyone online shares the same understanding of CITES. Let me outline some key aspects of the Convention in very general terms.
在回答这两个问题之前,我们应先理解CITES的运行机制。与会各位或许并不都对CITES有同样的认识,于是我想先大概介绍CITES公约的一些重点内容。

CITES is an international legally binding agreement adopted in 1973 that sets rules for international trade in wildlife. Under CITES wildlife means animals (marine and terrestrial) and plants. It regulates international trade to ensure such trade is not detrimental to the survival of the species. It does not deal with domestic trade, markets or consumption, or poaching. It is about the cross-border movement of wildlife.
《濒危野生动植物种国际贸易公约》(CITES)建立于1973年,是关于国际野生生物贸易的有法律约束力的协议。在CITES的定义下,野生物种指的是动物(陆生动物和海洋动物)和植物。CITES公约管理野生物种国际贸易,以确保这类贸易不会威胁物种的存续。但是CITES不管理国内贸易、国内市场、消费或盗猎,只管理关于野生物种的跨境活动。

CITES currently regulates international trade in over 36,000 species of wild animals and plants. The nature of the various trade measures utilized by CITES to regulate this trade depends primarily upon the biological status of the species.
目前在CITES公约的管理范围内有3.6万多种野生动植物。CITES主要根据这些动植物物种的生存现状,来制定各种贸易管理办法。

Commercial trade in some wild caught specimens is prohibited under CITES and in other specimens it is allowed but is strictly regulated through a permit system to avoid overexploitation. There is illegal trade associated with both prohibited and regulated trade.
在CITES公约管理下,部分野生物种的商业贸易是禁止的,有些物种的贸易可以进行,但是为了避免资源过度开发,受获准体系严格管控。在禁止和受管控的物种中,都存在着非法贸易的现象。

CITES does not encourage or discourage trade – it regulates trade when it does take place. States determine whether to trade or not and they may impose stricter domestic measures, meaning they can regulate wildlife trade more strictly than CITES requires, should they choose to do so.
CITES公约既不鼓励贸易,也不抑制贸易,而是在贸易进行的过程中进行管控。各国自行决定是否进行贸易,也可以在国内采取更严格的管控措施,也就是说,如果各国愿意,他们在管控野生物种贸易时可以做到比CITES公约更严格。

From a public health perspective, we are not concerned with trade in the 30,000 plants species under CITES, including for timber, like certain rosewood species, fragrance and medicines, like agarwood and African Cherry bark, and flowers, like orchids and snowdrops.
从公共健康的角度来看,我们无需担忧受CITES管辖的约3万种野生植物物种的贸易,包括用于制造木材(比如某种红木)、香料、医药(比如沉香和非洲樱桃树皮)的物种贸易,或是花类贸易(比如兰花和雪花莲)。

Further, of the 6,000 CITES-listed animal species only a limited number are of interest from a public health perspective, mainly terrestrial mammals, and birds, possibly amphibians, and reptiles. The cetaceans, corals, fish, insects, sharks, rays, shellfish and more, all have their issues, but not from a public health perspective from what I can ascertain.
此外,在CITES列出的6千个动物物种中,只有一小部分值得公共安全领域关注,主要是陆生哺乳动物、鸟类、可能还有两栖动物以及爬行动物。虽然鲸类动物、珊瑚、鱼类、昆虫、鲨鱼、鳐鱼、贝类动物等也都存在一定问题,但是我可以确定地说,它们目前对公共健康不会有太大的威胁。

-----

The value and effectiveness of CITES depends upon which lens you view it from.
从什么角度来看待CITES,能够决定CITES的价值和效力。

While it has its flaws, and continual improvement is needed, when viewed through the lens of avoiding over-exploitation of listed species the Convention has been quite effective. This is its core mandate, which CITES Parties have steadfastly adhered to.
虽然CITES公约依然存在不足,还需不断完善,但该公约在避免过度开发其列出的物种方面十分有效。这也是公约的核心职责,公约缔约方也在坚定不移地跟进。

The same cannot be said when the Convention is viewed through the lens of public health. CITES does not address public health issues. The same observation can be made in relation to animal health, and alien invasive species, which again do not feature in CITES decision making.
但是从公共健康的角度看,我们无法得出相同的结论。CITES公约没有关注到公共健康议题,也没有在决策中关注到动物健康、外来物种入侵等议题。

This is not an accident, the 183 Parties to CITES have been quite consistent in keeping the focus of the Convention on the biological aspects of wildlife trade to avoid overexploitation.
这不是偶然疏漏, 而是CITES公约的183个缔约方始终一致坚持将该公约的重点放在野生动物贸易的生物性的方面,以避免资源过度利用。

However, can this rather narrow focus be sustained in a post COVID-19 world, one that is now acutely aware of the massive damage that zoonotic pandemics can do to economies and societies across every continent, along with the call by the World Health Organisation (WHO) to take a ‘One Health’ approach, namely to bring public health, animal health, plant health and the environment closer together.
但是,这一相对狭窄的关注点在经历过新冠肺炎疫情的世界里还能继续维持下去吗?在后新冠肺炎时代,人们意识到动物性大流行病会对全世界的经济和社会造成巨大损失,世界卫生组织也呼吁各国采取“同一个健康”的途径,也就是将公共健康、动物健康、植物健康和环境更加紧密联系在一起。

CITES is not embedded into the public health or animal health discourse. As Secretary-General, I tried to connect with these issues in 2016 when I signed a cooperation agreement with the World Animal Health Organisation (OIE). Yet, while cooperation agreements between Secretariats are useful and offer an entry point for deeper discourse, they cannot change core mandates.
在公共健康和动物健康话语体系里,并没有CITES的身影。作为秘书长,我曾在2016年和世界动物卫生组织(OIE)签订一份合作协议时,试图衔接这些议题。虽然两个机构秘书处之间的合作十分有效,为深入探讨议题提供切入点,但是并不能改变核心职责。

-----

Risks to public health through wildlife-related zoonotic diseases can come from unregulated, regulated, and illegal wildlife trade.
与野生动物有关的人畜共患疾病带给公众健康的风险,可能源自不受监管、管控的、以及非法的野生动物贸易。

When looked at through a public health lens, the current system is inadequate for regulating wildlife trade, markets and consumption that could pose a risk to public health.
从公共健康角度看,目前的体系还不足以监管可能威胁公共健康的野生动物贸易、市场和消费。

Left as it is our system is not going to prevent the next pandemic. It could, in fact, be raising our potential exposure to zoonotic diseases that can spill over from wild animals to people.
我们目前的体系还不足以预防下一场大流行病,甚至可能会提高我们接触野生动物身上的动物性疾病的几率。

Profound changes are needed. Let me explain why.
我们需要深刻变革,原因如下。

CITES regulates trade in listed species. The listing of a species is based upon trade and biological criteria. It does not include the risks to public health, or animal health, of wildlife trade. For example, horseshoe bats, a likely source of the COVID-19 pandemic are not listed, along with many other bat species, which are known to harbour multiple viruses.
CITES公约管理名单物种的贸易。一个物种是否列入名单,是由贸易和生物标准决定的。这一标准不包括野生物种贸易对公共健康或动物健康的危害。比如菊头蝠,它可能是新冠肺炎疫情的来源,但并不在附录名单里,还有许多其他蝙蝠种类也不在附录名单内。我们都知道蝙蝠体内存在着大量的病毒。

When trade is regulated the CITES Management Authority considers whether the traded species have been legally obtained and whether the scientific non-detrimental finding says that the trade will not be detrimental to the survival of the species. If the answer to both is yes, the trade will be permitted. Under the Convention, the Authority is not obliged to consider the public health risks of the trade, nor the risks to animal health, or for that matter or whether the species may become invasive.
在监管贸易的过程中,CITES公约的管理部门将考虑贸易物种是否为非法获得,根据科学调查,该贸易是否会威胁物种生存。如果贸易物种不是非法获得、也不会影响物种生存,该贸易将获准。在该公约的框架下,履约机构并没有义务考虑贸易对公共健康的风险,亦或对动物健康的威胁,或是可能带来的物种入侵。

These shortcomings have recently been highlighted in an excellent article by Dr Jonathan Kolby.
乔纳森·科尔比博士(Jonathan Kolby)近期发表了一篇优秀的文章,文中重点提及CITES的这些缺陷。

In addition, CITES does not regulate the way the wildlife is harvested, handled, or stored in the source State, or how it is handled, stored, sold or consumed in the destination State. Captive breeding facilities, which now account for close to 60% of trade in animals, are not assessed by CITES on public health grounds.
此外,CITES公约也不监管人们在来源国获取、处理或储存野生物种的方式,或是野生动物在目的国的处理、储存、出售或消费方式。圈养设施里的动物目前占将近60%的动物贸易,这些设施并没有经CITES公约从公共安全的角度审核。

Yet all of these activities can pose a risk factor for the emergence of zoonotic diseases.
但是以上这些活动都有可能成为引起动物性传染病爆发的因素。

-----

On illegal wildlife trade, in the absence of any alternative, for the eight years that I served CITES, we worked with Parties and many stakeholders, to use the Convention to crank up the fight against illegal wildlife trade. We stretched the mandate of the Convention, and in doing so we had some good success. Here CITES can and must continue to make an important contribution through the ICCWC (International Consortium on Combating Wildlife Crime).
在非法野生动植物的贸易监管方面,目前还没有可以代替CITES的体系。我在CITES工作的八年里,我们和缔约方还有许多利益关切者进行合作,利用公约框架加大对非法野生动物贸易的打击。我们扩大了公约的职责范围,取得不少优秀成果。CITES公约能够、也应继续通过国际打击野生动植物犯罪同盟(ICCWC)做出重要贡献。

But CITES has its limitations. It only applies to 36,000 of the world’s 8 million species, and to the cross-border movement of specimens. It does not require illegal trade to be criminalized, nor does it apply to poaching. It creates management and scientific authorities, but not enforcement authorities, and it is not a natural forum for police or other enforcement officials.
但是CITES也有局限之处。全世界总共有800万个物种,CITES只涵盖其中3.6万个物种的相关跨境活动。该公约没有要求给非法贸易定罪,也没有管控盗猎行为。公约制定管理办法和设立官方科学机构,但并没有执法部门,也没有为警察或其他执法人员提供平台。

Our inability to be able to turn the corner with ending wildlife crime is best illustrated by the record levels of illegal trade in pangolins over the past two years, which coincided with them being given the highest level of protection under the Convention. Pangolins are also a possible intermediate host of COVID-19.
我们在终止野生动物犯罪的工作上没有进展,其中最明显体现的是过去两年内穿山甲非法贸易的破纪录式增长,而穿山甲恰巧是公约保护力度最大的动物。穿山甲也可能是新型冠状肺炎的中间宿主。

-----

So, what are we to do?
那么我们能做什么?

We must finally grasp the nettle with wildlife crime, recognise the massive impacts wildlife crime has on economies, ecosystems, public and animal health, security, and local people.
我们必须大刀阔斧地解决野生动物犯罪问题,认识到野生动物犯罪对经济、生态系统、公共和动物健康、安全以及当地人群的巨大影响。

With the benefit of the IPBES Global Assessment, we must look beyond CITES listed species and use the law to help countries stop the theft of all their wildlife, plants and animals, terrestrial and marine, not just those species that are on the brink of extinction.
生物多样性和生态系统服务政府间科学-政策平台(IPBES)全球评估体系带来许多益处,我们必须超越CITES名单里的物种,利用法律工具帮助各国终止所有野生动植物——包括植物和野生动物(陆生和海洋)的盗取行为,而不仅只关注那些处在灭绝边缘的物种。

CITES was never designed to deal with wildlife crime. It is time to embed combating serious wildlife crimes where it belongs. We must embed it into the international criminal law framework, which can be done via a Protocol to the UN Convention against Transnational Organised Crime, as has been done for other serious crimes.
CITES并不是为应对野生动植物犯罪而生,但是现在我们应该将打击严重野生动植物犯罪纳入CITES的工作体系了。我们必须将其纳入国际刑法框架内,与管控其他严重犯罪行为相似的,我们可以通过在联合国打击跨国有组织犯罪公约下签订议定书来实现。

As regards wildlife trade and related laws, they must be part of a ‘One Health’ approach. As I see it, there are three options at international level to build public health into wildlife trade laws, which could also be expanded to include animal health. We can:
至于野生动物贸易和相关法律,它们也应纳入“同一个健康”办法内。我认为在国际层面有三种方法可以将公共健康成为野生动物贸易法的一部分,这些方法的适用范围也可扩大到动物健康。方法如下:

 - amend CITES to include public health criteria for listing species, possibly via a new Appendix, create a new Committee on Public Heath, and oblige Management Authorities to take account of public health issues before issuing any certificate or permit.
——修订CITES公约内容,使其包括名单物种的公共健康标准,可以通过新增附录,建立新的公共健康委员会来实现,让管理部门在下发证明或许可前必须考虑公共健康问题等方式实现。

- create a new Protocol under the Convention on Biological Diversity, as has been done for Living Modified Organisms and Access and Benefit Sharing.
——在《生物多样性公约》下签订新的议定书,正如之前我们为改性活生物体及遗传资源获取与惠益分享而制定新议定书。

- create a new Agreement under the World Health Organisation, as has been done for Tobacco Control, which recognises the serious public health consequences of tobacco.
——在世界卫生组织领导下签订新协议,正如之前人们意识到烟草对公共健康的严重危害而制定控制烟草的协议。

My initial preference was to look to CITES, given its exiting mandate to regulate trade, as well as its well-established governance and permitting processes. It is, however, a big step for CITES to shift its focus after close to 50 years and if it does not find favour we also have other good options, which may even offer greater scope as they start afresh.
考虑到CITES公约管理贸易的职责,健全的治理体系和获准程序,我最初的想法是依靠CITES公约来实现这一切。但是让CITES公约改变其近50年来的工作重心将会是一个重大举措,如果这一提议公约成员国不赞成,那么我们还有其他不错的选择,采用这些办法必须从零开始,但是或许未来涉及的范围会更宽广。

It is of course, ultimately a matter for States.
当然,这些问题最终应由各国来解决。

-----

What is essential is that we not lose sight of the critical need to bring the world of wildlife trade, markets and consumption together with the world of public health, and animal health, which we must do if we are to avert the next wildlife-related pandemic.
最基本的是,我们不能忽视将野生动物贸易、市场和消费与公共健康和动物健康结合,如果我们想要避免下一次与野生动物相关的大流行病,必须做到这一点。

At the present time, States are doing this by taking stricter domestic measures to ban wildlife trade, markets and consumption, as we have seen in China, Vietnam, Gabon and Bolivia. We could also envisage resolutions coming from various bodies on these issues, including the UN General Assembly, the World Health Assembly and more.
目前各国可通过采取更严格的措施,管控野生动物贸易、市场和消费,也就是中国、越南、加蓬和玻利维亚正在采取的措施。其他组织也可以提供解决办法,比如联合国大会、世界卫生大会等。

However, to succeed not just now, but into the future, we need to elevate these actions into a global forum, through a new or an amended convention, where open and transparent, scientifically based decisions can be taken in the collective interest, to ensure we do all we can to effectively mitigate the risk, while avoiding unintended consequences.
然而,为了不仅在当下,在未来也取得成功,可以通过制定或修订公约,我们需要将这些行动提升到一个国际论坛的高度,来为共同的利益作出公开、透明、以科学为基础的决定,以确保我们竭尽全力能有效地减轻风险,同时避免意外结果。

So, back to the question that was posed to me, is CITES enough or do we need more? We clearly need more, and if we manage to take these sorts of actions, I believe we will be best placed to avert the next wildlife-related pandemic.
那么,现在回到一开始的问题:“CITES公约就够了吗,还是我们需要更多行动?”显然我们仍需努力,而且如果我们最终能够采取行动,我相信我们将可以避免下一场与野生动物相关的大流行病。

But if we do not act boldly now to institutionalise the changes that are needed to laws, as well as related funding and programmes, I fear we may find ourselves back in the same place in the not too distant future.
但是我们如果不大胆行动,将相关法律的修订、相关基金和项目制度化,我担心未来我们可能再次陷入与如今相同的境地。

Thank you, Sheila, and back to you.
谢谢各位,谢谢希拉,我的发言完毕。
 发送邮件至zhengwu@thepaper.cn申请加入澎湃政务号或媒体团
特别声明
本文为政务等机构在澎湃新闻上传并发布,仅代表该机构观点,不代表澎湃新闻的观点或立场,澎湃新闻仅提供信息发布平台。

评论(0)

热新闻

澎湃新闻APP下载

客户端下载

热话题

关于澎湃 在澎湃工作 联系我们 广告及合作 版权声明 隐私政策 友情链接 澎湃新闻举报受理和处置办法 严正声明