3-4 Arguement.docx

3. Rashida did not violate AEWA Articles II and III and Resolutions 3.18 and 4.15

It is in the objectives of the AEWA agreement to ensure habitat conservation of waterbirds.1 Rashida in dispensing disinfectants to the Aisha Marsh was acting in accordance to this rule as their primary intention was to prevent the spread of the virus around the very habitat of the waterbirds and in a way conserving such area. Furthermore, Rashida in their responses, did not violate AEWA Articles II and III, since the right of any Party to adopt a stricter measure involving conservation of migratory water birds and their habitats is not affected by the provisions of AEWA agreement. 2 Under AEWA also, Parties may implement necessary emergency measures whenever exceptionally unfavorable or endangering conditions occur anywhere in the Agreement area, in this case the outbreak of the highly pathogenic avian influenza in the Aisha Marsh and the emergency measures are the culling and the dispensing of disinfectants. 3 Resolutions 3.18 and 4.15 of the AEWA, put forth by Abayomi against Rashida, are nonbinding to Rashida, but nevertheless their responses are still in accordance to the objectives of these resolutions which is to prevent the spread of the avian influenza in the Aisha Marsh.

1

Annex 3 paragraph 3 of AEWA Article XI of AEWA 3 Annex 3, paragraph 2.3 of AEWA 2

4. Rashida did not violate CBD Article 5 and 8

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) recognizes the importance of biodiversity to humankind and seeks Parties to implement measures to conserve this biological diversity.4 And in accordance with CBD in promoting the protection of ecosystems, natural habitats and the maintenance of viable populations of species in natural surroundings, the actions of Rashida to combat the spread of the virus in the Aisha Marsh, as this said virus can infect birds and animals as well, are very much in line with the objectives of the convention and the provisions of Article VIII.5 CBD also recognizes the difference between developed country Parties and developing country Parties, and the extent of the implementation of the commitments of these developing country Parties. The convention fully takes into account that economic and social development and eradication of poverty are overriding priorities for such developing country Parties. 6 Hence Rashida, a developing country that is dependent on poultry industry and tourism of Aisha Marsh, in dispensing disinfectants to mitigate the spread of the avian flu virus did not violate CBD as their acts were clearly motivated by overriding priorities of economic and health.

4

Preamble, CBD Article VIII, par 8, CBD 6 Art 20 par 4, CBD 5