ARCHIVES HISTORIQUES 
DE LA COMMISSION 
 
 
 
COLLECTION RELIEE DES 
DOCUMENTS "COM" 
 
 
 
 
COM (85) 008 
 
 
 
Vol. 1985/00 02 
  
 
Disclaimer  
Conformém ent au règlement (CEE, Euratom) n° 354/83 du Conseil du 1er février 1983 
concernant l'ouverture au public des archives historiques de la Communauté économique 
européenne et de la Communauté européenne de l'énergie atomique (JO L 43 du 15.2.1983, 
p. 1), tel que modifié par le règlement (CE, Euratom) n° 1700/2003 du 22 septembre 2003 
(JO L 243 du 27.9.2003, p. 1), ce dossier est ouvert au public. Le cas échéant, les documents 
classifiés présents dans ce dossier ont été déclassifiés conformément à l'article 5 dudit 
règlem ent. 
In accordance with Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 354/83 of 1 February 1983 
concerning the opening to the public of the historical archives of the European Econom ic 
Communit y and the European Atom ic Energy Communit y (OJ L 43, 15.2.1983, p. 1), as 
amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1700/2003 of 22 September 2003 (OJ L 243, 
27.9.2003, p. 1), t his file is open to the public. Where necessary, classified documents in this 
file have been declassified in conformity with Article 5 of the aforementioned regulation.  
In Übereinstimmung mit der Verordnung (EWG, Euratom) Nr. 354/83 des Rates vom  1. 
Februa r 1983 über die Freigabe der historischen Archive der Europäischen  
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft und der Europäischen Atomgem einschaft (ABI. L 43 vom  15.2.1983,  
S. 1), geändert durch die Verordnung (EG, Euratom) Nr. 1700/2003 vom 22. Septem ber 2003  
(ABI. L 243 v om 27.9.2003, S. 1), ist diese Datei der Öffentlichkeit zugänglich. Soweit  
erforderlich, wurden die Verschlusssachen in dieser Datei in Übereinstimmung mit Artikel 5  
der genannten Verordnung freigegeben.  
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
CO M(85) 8 f in a l
B ru s s e ls , 16 January 1985
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL
concerning the negotiations for a global framework Convention  
on the protection of the ozone layer
COM( 85) 8 f in a l

EXPLANATORY M EM O R AN D U M
1. On 19 January 1982 (4132/82 ENV.4) the C ouncil decided to a u th o ris e  the 
Commission to p a r tic ip a te  in  the n e g o tia tio n s  fo r a g lo b a l framework 
convention on the p ro te c tio n  o f the ozone la ye r in  order to enable the 
Community to become a c o n tra c tin g  p a r ty . The Community and i t s  Member S tates 
have taken p a rt in  a l l  the p re p a ra tio n  o f a te x t which could form a fu tu re  
Ozone Layer C onvention, and o f the d r a ft te x t of the f i r s t  P ro to co l to
the proposed co nve n tion .
2. The o n ly im portant q u e stio n  rem aining to be resolved on the te x t o f the 
Convention is  the clause which would p e rm it the Community to become a  
c o n tra c tin g  p a rty .
3. In October 1984 the C ouncil approved 59804/84, 23 O ct. 1984) a proposal
o f the Commission (9693/84 ENV. 167, C0M(84) 549 f in a l )  proposing th a t the 
Commission should t r y  to n e g o tia te  a clause a llo w in g  re g io n a l economic 
in te g ra tio n  o rg a n is a tio n s  to p a r tic ip a te  w ith o u t any c o n d itio n s . The 
Commission d id  not wish to accept any clause which would make p a r tic ip a tio n  
by the Community su b je ct to p r io r  p a r tic ip a tio n  by one Member S tate (as the 
USA had proposed) or by a m a jo rity  o f the Member S tates (as the USSR had 
proposed). I t  was decided th a t in  the case o f m ajor d i f f i c u l t i e s  in  the 
n e g o tia tio n s , the Commission would seek fu r th e r  in s tr u c tio n s  from the C o u ncil.
4. I t  has not proved p o s s ib le  to n e g o tia te  a clause on the lin e s  envisaged in  
O ctober. However, the s e rv ic e s  o f the Commission b e lie v e  th a t agreement on
a clause s u b s ta n tia lly  on the tin e s  o f th a t in  the Annex to th is  Communication 
could be o bta in ed  in  p a r tic u la r  from the USA.
5. The Commission is  th e re fo re  in v ite d , as was envisaged in  the D ecision of 
23 October 1984 (9804/84) to propose th a t the C ouncil should a u th o ris e  the 
Commission to n e g o tia te  a clause s u b s ta n tia lly  on the lin e s  set out in  the 
Annex.
6. T his vould represent a sm all but s ig n if ic a n t  change in  the p o s itio n  of the 
Community. The C ouncil must be requested to a u th o ris e  th is  as ra p id ly  as 
p o s s ib le , since the next w orking session on the d r a ft Ozone Layer Convention 
w i l l  take place from January 21st to 25th.

COMMUNICATION TO  THE COUNCIL 
concerning
the n e g o tia tio n s  fo r a g lo b a l framework Convention on the p ro te c tio n  of
the ozone layer
1. On 19 January 1982 the C ouncil decided to a u th o ris e  the Commission to 
p a r tic ip a te  in  the n e g o tia tio n s  fo r a g lo b a l framework convention on the 
p ro te c tio n  o f the ozone layer in  order to enable the Community to become 
a c o n tra c tin g  p a rty . The Community and i t s  Member S tates have taken p a rt 
in  a l l  the p re p a ra tio n  o f a te x t which could form a fu tu re  Ozone Layer 
C onvention, and o f the d r a ft te x t o f the f i r s t  ProtocoL to the proposed Conventioi
2. The o nly im portant q u e stio n  rem aining to be resolved on the te x t o f the 
Convention is  the clause which would p erm it the Community to become a c o n tra c tin g  
p a rty .
3. In October 1984 the C ouncil approved (9804/84, 23.10.1984) a proposal of the 
Commission (9693/84 ENV. 167, C0M(84) 549 f in a l )  proposing th a t the Commission 
should t r y  to n e g o tia te  a clause a llo w in g  re g io n a l economic in te g ra tio n  
o rg a n is a tio n s  to p a r tic ip a te  w ith o u t any c o n d itio n s . The Commission d id  not 
wish to accept any clause which would make p a r tic ip a tio n  by the Community 
su b je ct to p r io r  p a r tic ip a tio n  by one Member S tate (as the USA had proposed) 
or by a  m a jo rity  o f the Member S tates (as the USSR had proposed). I t  was 
decided th a t in  the case of major d i f f i c u l t i e s  in  the n e g o tia tio n s , the 
Commission would seek fu r th e r  in s tru c tio n s  from the C o u n cil.
4. I t  has not proved p o s s ib le  to n e g o tia te  a c la u s e , on the lin e s  envisaged in  
O ctober. However, the s e rvice s o f the Commission b e lie v e  th a t agreement on
a clause s u b s ta n tia lly  on the lin e s  o f th a t in  the Annex to th is  Communication 
could be obtained in  p a r tic u la r  from the USA.
5. The C ouncil is  th e re fo re  requested, as was envisaged in  the d e c is io n  of 23 
October 1984 (9 8 0 4 /8 4 ), to a u th o ris e  the Commission to n e g o tia te  a clause 
s u b s ta n tia lly  on the lin e s  set out in  the Annex. The C ouncil is  requested to 
a u th o ris e  th is  as ra p id ly  as p o s s ib le , since the next w orking session on the 
d r a ft ozone layer convention w i l l  take place from January 21st to 25th.

~  2 -
6. The clause envisaged in the Annex has the imper tans advantage 
over draft clauses previously suggested that it makes t  he 
decision whether and on what basis the convention and any future 
protocol, to it should be treated as a "mixed" agreement entirely 
in the hands of the Community (and of any other organisation to 
which the clause would apply). All aspects of the decision 
whether the Community should become a party, and on what basis, 
and all questions of Community law which might arise in con­
nection with it, would be wholly for the Community to resolve.
7. The draft clause annexed also has the advantage that it makes
clear that the question whether an international organisât ion may 
become a contracting party without one (or more) of its Member 
States depends on its own willingness to accept all the obli­
gations under the convention or protocol, and not on any opinion 
of the parties to the convention about the capacity of such 
organisations to enter into international agreements. This is 
useful because the US position is due to the fact that the US 
docs not wish to have, as treaty partners, organisations which do 
not accept all the obligations under the treaty in question 
unless at least one of their Member States is also .1 party and 
can fulfil the obligations not undertaken by the orqanisation.  In 
the view of the USA, to accept only one Member State is already a 
compromise.
8. It will be seen that the clause does not mention the Community by 
name and would not apply only to the Community.  It should be 
stressed that the convention as drafted does not permit reser­
vations.
9. Under the draft convention the Community would have a number of 
votes corresponding to the number of its Member States which are 
parties to the convention. It will be necessary to add a clause 
giving the Community one vote if it becomes a party without any 
Member State. At the last negotiations in Geneva the USSR 
delegation proposed for the first time that the Community should 
have only one vote when it was exercising its exclusive com­
petence, irrespective of the number of Member States which

- 3 -
might be contracting parties. The Commission's representative 
immediately rejected this suggestion. Since it would create a 
wholly new and serious difficulty, it is believed that the USSR 
would not be able to pursue it successfully.

■c
ANNEX
Possible new Article 12(2) of the proposed ozone layer con­
vention .
Any regional economic integration organisation which becomes a 
party to this convention or to any protocol to it shall be bound 
by all the obligations resulting from the convention or the 
protocol, as the case may be, unless at the time of acceptance o 
ratification it accepts only certain obligations, in which case 
it. may accept or ratify the convention or protocol only if at 
least one of the Member States of the organisation becomes a 
party to the convention or protocol at the same time.
»