WHAT HAPPENED ON LOSS AND DAMAGE IN WEEK ONE OF COP 30?
The Peoples Climate Summit is happening alongside COP30 in Belém, Brazil. Today the Peoples Summit March took place with thousands of protesters marching through Belém towards the COP 30 venue including many representatives of the Amazon’s Indigenous Peoples. (Loss and Damage Collaboration).
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), thirtieth Conference of the Parties (COP 30) has reached its halfway point in Belém, Brazil.
Recent and ongoing climate intensified disasters such as Hurricane Melissa in Jamaica, Cuba and Haiti, back-to-back typhoons in the Philippines, and the powerful tornado that struck in Brazil, demonstrate the urgency of addressing the loss and damage that is being caused by the climate crisis. Has week one of COP 30 made enough progress on urgently scaling up loss and damage support?
Launch of the Call for Proposal for the Start Up Phase of the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage — the Barbados Implementation Modalities
%20(1).jpg)
The Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage (FRLD), was established at COP 27 in Egypt in 2022 and was operationalised at COP 28 in Dubai. It is a fund to deliver money to developing countries and the communities within them to address loss and damage.
On the first day of COP 30, the FRLD launched the call for funding requests for its start up phase —the Barbados Implementation Modalities (BIM). A total of 250 million USD is allocated to the BIM and once the call for funding requests officially opens on the 15th of December developing countries will have six months to submit their funding request for projects and programs of between 5-20 million USD. The Board of the Fund will then start approving requests at its ninth Board meeting in July, 2026. For developing countries preparing funding requests technical assistance is available from the Santiago Network and will soon be available from the Fund itself.
The BIM provides a critical opportunity for the FRLD to learn through doing at the same time as the Fund’s Board works to develop its long term policies in parallel. The projects and programs delivered under the BIM will provide long overdue support to countries and communities who have until now picked up the bill for loss and damage wrought by a climate crisis they have done little or nothing to cause. It is also an important opportunity for developing countries to demonstrate how the Fund can deliver community access and rapidly release funds by putting in place national financial arrangements, despite the FRLD itself not being able to do this under the BIM.
Whilst we welcome the launch of the call for funding request by the FRLD, 250 million USD is just a drop in the ocean compared to what is needed— scientists project that developing countries need 395 billion USD in 2025 alone. There is also much work to be done to make the Fund fit for purpose including ensuring that the fund is filled with at least 400 billion USD a year, that it can respond within 48 hours of a climate intensified disaster and that it guarantees direct access to small grants for communities.
Read our full reaction to the launch of the call for funding request for the BIM here.
Third Review of the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage
The Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage (WIM) is the oldest piece of the Loss and Damage support landscape. Its functions include enhancing knowledge, strengthening dialogue and coordination, and enhancing action and support. It consists of an Executive Committee (ExCom) with five expert groups which serves as a policy and knowledge hub for Loss and Damage and the Santiago Network —a network to enhance implementation.
The third review of the WIM was scheduled to take place at COP 29 in Baku, Azerbaijan in November, 2024, but agreement could not be reached and it has continued through the 2025 June Climate Meetings to COP 30.
There were 14 hours of negotiations on the third review of the WIM this week, many of which happened behind closed doors. Parties (countries) have been given more time to continue negotiations next week on the basis of an informal note capturing the text that they have developed so far. This informal note has no legal status, but it does give us a sense of the areas where agreement might be possible with areas of agreement highlighted in green.
Areas in green include elements on: 1). A State of Loss and Damage Report (aka Loss and Damage Gap Report); 2). Submission of and support for both developing countries and communities to access and prepare requests for technical assistance; 3). ExCom activities to enhance access to technical assistance and finance including knowledge product on existing methodologies for assessing the economic and non-economic loss and damage; and; 4). Elements to enhance coordination and complementarity between the ExCom, Santiago Network and FRLD.
Looking at the informal note, critical components where Parties still need to find a resolution are: 1). Voluntary guidance on the inclusion of Loss and Damage in national plans, including Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs); 2). Reference to Loss and Damage components within the decision on the first Global Stocktake; 3). Addressing the urgent need to scale up finance for Loss and Damage; and; 4). Preambular paragraphs that welcome the findings of the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) historic Advisory Opinion on Climate Change (ICJAO) and acknowledge the central importance of human rights in the context of loss and damage.
As negotiations continue on the third WIM review next week, we call on Parties and the COP 30 Presidency to push for an ambitious outcome that delivers at the very least all of the outcomes listed above.
Find out more about the WIM and what is at stake under the third review here.
Report of the Fund for responding to Loss and Damage and guidance to the Fund
This week negotiations got under way on the 2025 report of the FRLD. These discussions provided an important opportunity to provide guidance to the Fund that can help to ensure that it is filled, responds quickly and that money reaches the most vulnerable communities on the frontlines of the climate crisis.
During the negotiations we heard Parties reactions to the first draft decision text. Core demands and areas of contention revolved around: 1). Whether or not the FRLD needs guidance; 2). Asking the Fund to speed up work on long term policies on small grants and rapid disbursement (amongst others); and; 3). Reminding contributors to pay their pledges into the FRLD’s bank account. Yet perhaps the biggest sticking point was on asking the FRLD to take into account paragraph 16 of the decision made in Dubai on the New Collective Quantified Goal on Climate Finance (NCQG). An important paragraph that speaks to increasing public finance to all climate funds —including the FRLD— and tripling their outward flows by 2030.
Developing country Parties and Groups were united under the G77 and China on the call to include reference to paragraph 16 of the NCQG. Whilst for the Least Developed Countries, and Alliance of Small Island States ensuring that the FRLD can respond rapidly and ensure direct and simplified access to all developing countries was a top priority. Those looking like they could block progress included the EU, UK, Canada and Australia who were sceptical about the need to provide guidance to the Fund, speeding up work on key policies such as those on rapid disbursement and uncomfortable with the reference to paragraph 16.
As negotiations continue on the guidance to review next week, we call on Parties and the COP 30 Presidency to ensure an ambitious outcome that speeds up the work of the FRLD on small grants and rapid disbursement and ensures the implementation of paragraph 16 of the NCQG.
Joint Annual Report of the Executive Committee of the WIM and the Advisory Board of the Santiago Network for Loss and Damage
This week we saw the adoption of the 2024 Joint Annual Report (JAR) and 2025 JAR of the Executive Committee of the WIM and the Advisory Board of the Santiago Network. With the WIM review ongoing, Paties decided to take a very simple procedural decision on the 2025 JAR to ensure that there was enough time to reach a substantial outcome on the WIM review. As a result no guidance is provided to the WIM ExCom or Santiago Network. However, the WIM review provides ample opportunity to strengthen the work of both institutions.
Loss and Damage Support is available right now!
One of the strongest messages that we are hearing at COP 30 on Loss and Damage is that support is already available from the FRLD, WIM ExCom and the Santiago Network and that developing countries are strongly encouraged to request it. This message came across loud and clear in three important side events, one convened by the Santiago Network, one by the ExCom of the WIM and the other a joint side event convened by all three Loss and Damage institutions. During these events information was provided on how to make funding requests to the FRLD under the BIM, how to request technical assistance from the Santiago Network and join its membership and how to use the WIM ExCom’s knowledge products.
Where are the Loss and Damage pledges?
However, one thing that certainly was not as encouraging was the abysmal amount of Loss and Damage finance pledges made. At the end of week one of COP 30 only two pledges have been made. One from Spain, who has pledged 20 million Euros to the FRLD and one from Switzerland, who has pledged 1 million Swiss Francs to the Santiago Network. Whilst these pledges are very welcome indeed they are a drop in the bucket compared to the scale of the Loss and Damage finance needs of developing countries. Our calculations suggest that at least 724.43 billion USD need to be flowing through the Loss and Damage support landscape each year. Therefore, we call on developed countries to step up and meet their Loss and Damage finance obligations under the UNFCCC and its Paris Agreement, human rights and international law.
The ICJAO is Making an Impact at COP 30
With the delivery of the ICJ’s historic Advisory Opinion on the Obligations of States in regards to Climate Change in June it has been clarified that climate action is not optional — it’s the law. This includes urgently scaling up support and action on avoiding (through emission reductions), minimising (through adaptation) and addressing loss and damage. That is because the ICJAO reaffirmed that states need to: 1). Prevent climate harm; 2). Co-operate to address loss and damage suffered by people and ecosystems; and; 3). Uphold human rights in their responses to the climate crisis.
COP 30 is the first COP since the delivery of the ICJAO and in the negotiations we have seen commendable leadership from a number of countries on the frontlines of the climate crisis who have pushed to include reference to the ICJAO in negotiating texts. A proposal was drafted in a small huddle which Parties engaged on but the language never made it into the informal note. Despite it being extremely disappointing that the language was not included, the COP is not over! Therefore we call on all states to show their intent to cooperate by aligning, not just the outcome of the WIM review, but all COP 30 decisions with the findings of the ICJ AO.
‘poorly lit’ area
Dec 08, 2025, 00:46 IST
Share
AA+
Text Size
- Small
- Medium
- Large
Mohali: A miscreant snatched a gold chain of a woman police constable in Zirakpur. Anju, a resident of Saini Vihar, Phase 5, Zirakpur, who is posted as a constable with Chandigarh Police, was on her way to the local market at around 7:30pm on Dec 2 when a motorcyclist approached her from behind and snatched her gold chain weighing about 2.5 tolas. Then he sped away through narrow lanes.Anju said the area was poorly lit at the time and she could not note down the registration number of the motorcycle. She added that the accused was wearing a helmet and a cream jacket and said she would be able to identify him if he was produced before her.The victim initially tried to trace the accused on her own but later approached Zirakpur police station with her husband to lodge a formal complaint. Acting on her statement, police registered a case and alerted patrolling teams in the area.Head constable Kuldeep Singh has been assigned to investigate the case, registered under Section 304 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). Police are examining CCTV footage from nearby houses, shops, and street cameras to identify the culprit.Police have also linked the incident to a recent rise in similar crimes in and around Zirakpur.
On Nov 14, 2025, two bike-borne assailants snatched a gold chain with a pendant from a scooter rider, Mandeep Kaur, on Babatpur Road. The incident was captured on CCTV, and the stolen chain was valued at around Rs 2 lakh.On Nov 26, 2025, at around 2 pm, two unknown youths on a motorcycle snatched a gold chain from Anuradha, a school teacher residing in Sigma City, Lohgarh. This daylight crime was also recorded on CCTV cameras.Police officials said that special teams have been formed to trace the accused and curb rising incidents of chain snatching in the region.
Waikato cop loses discharge bid after excessive pepper spray of motorist
Open Justice multimedia journalist, Waikato·NZ Herald·
5 Nov, 2025 09:00 AM6 mins to read
Sign in to save for later
Share
A Waikato police officer pepper-sprayed a motorist three times after he failed to hand over his car keys, a move deemed unlawful by a judge. Photo / NZME
A Waikato policeman who sprayed a speeding motorist three times with pepper spray for not handing over his car keys will now have to pay his victim $1000.
In the Hamilton District Court this morning, the judge found the officer’s actions were not only unlawful, but unwarranted, as the victim hadn’t done anything wrong.
He convicted the officer on a charge of assault with a weapon and ordered him to pay the victim $1000 in emotional harm reparation.
The police officer also lost his application for name suppression, but Judge Noel Cocurullo gave him 20 working days to consider appeals to either decision.
‘Already suffering immensely’
On the morning of January 10, last year, the officer, wearing his police uniform, was driving an unmarked patrol car north between Te Awamutu and Ōhaupō.
As he approached the end of a passing lane, he was overtaken by a motorist, causing him to brake and safely pull in behind him.
The officer immediately activated his flashing lights and the car pulled into a cemetery driveway about 500m away.
He approached the car’s passenger window, and the victim wound it down so they could speak.
The officer asked for his driver’s licence, which was given, and he began carrying out various checks before discovering his licence had expired four months earlier.
The victim’s vehicle also had no current registration or Warrant of Fitness (WoF).
The officer told the victim his licence had expired, that he was now forbidden to drive and asked him to hand over his car keys.
The victim said he didn’t understand the reason for handing his keys over and began to question the legitimacy of the demand.
It would later be revealed that the officer’s demand for the keys was unlawful, which in turn made all of his subsequent actions in using force unlawful.
The officer asked the victim “at least four times” for his keys before drawing a can of OC spray and aiming it at his face and telling him he would be sprayed if he didn’t comply or remain stopped.
The victim removed his keys from the ignition and held his hands up in a surrender position, displaying the keys at the same time.
When the officer went to grab them, the victim pulled his hand away, out of reach.
The officer then sprayed him twice in the face, debilitating the victim and causing him irritation, difficulty breathing, a runny nose, pain, a burning sensation and temporary blindness.
As he got out of his car, he dropped his eyeglasses.
The officer then appeared at the front of the car and sprayed the man, who was already suffering “immensely”, a third time.
The officer then took hold of him and placed him front forward over the bonnet of his car and put him in handcuffs, before putting him in his passenger seat.
He was then told he had been arrested for disorderly behaviour.
As the officer called for back-up from the communication centre, the victim could be heard in the background shouting loudly in distress.
The officer then agreed to release the victim from his handcuffs after he asked to use some baby wipes to wipe his eyes.
About half an hour later, the victim was told he had been forbidden to drive with the condition not to drive for another six hours so he could recover from the OC spray.
He was also given a ticket for making an unsafe passing manoeuvre and not displaying a current WoF.
The officer told him he would just get a warning for disorderly behaviour before dropping him off at a bus stop in Te Awamutu.
‘He presented a risk to the travelling public’
In an interview with his superior, the officer thought he could legally request the keys, he felt the victim “presented a risk to the travelling public” and the only tactical option available to him was using OC spray.
The superior considered the officer’s conduct “appropriate”, stating he was “dealing with an aggressive and non-compliant complainant”.
The judge noted that while the officer did not have any previous convictions, he had previously received a Section 106 discharge relating to an assault charge.
‘He was no threat’
Judge Cocurullo said, as he understood it, OC spray was used by police to bring an aggressive or non-compliant person under control.
“Here, there seems to have been no defensive position for you to take in the application of the spray.
“This man had not abused and/or threatened you.
“He had not, from the restricted position in the driver’s seat of the car, attempted to hit you.
“He had complied with some of your requests to stop the car and remove keys.
“It could only be said his non-compliance was that he refused your request to give keys over when you had no basis to do that in any event.”
Discover more
- ‘Careless’ cop drives 146km/h to chase stolen car, …
- ‘I just wanted McDonald’s’: The 20-year-old caught …
- Police officer charged with fracturing man’s ribs and …
- Cop discharged without conviction after assaulting …
Judge Cocurullo said it was a “significantly elevated response” to move immediately to a tactical option that was unlawful.
“At the time that originally happened … he was suffering the effects of being sprayed, he had lost his glasses to the ground.
“You then … delivered a third lot of OC spray to him before arresting him for disorderly behaviour.”
The judge said there was no evidence to suggest the victim had been disorderly.
“There was no evidence before me to conclude that the complainant was in any way aggressive.
“He was non-compliant with an unlawful command from you, but otherwise he was compliant.”
In an affidavit to the court, the officer said he was remorseful, had offered to make emotional harm reparation and was keen to attend a restorative justice conference, which the victim declined.
Do you have a justice story we should know about?
Contact the Open Justice team
It was also the first time in his police career that he had used OC spray.
Police would finalise their employment proceedings once the criminal prosecution had concluded.
But Judge Cocurullo wasn’t satisfied the grounds for a discharge were made out and convicted him.
“Here, the situation was a significant piece of conduct which I accept had not been planned or premeditated but upon which you got it significantly wrong.
“Moreso, the third delivery of OC spray … but went to an option that simply ought not to have been gone to.”
Judge Cocurullo declined name suppression, but allowed the officer 20 working days to consider an appeal, and ordered suppression continue.
Belinda Feek is an Open Justice reporter based in Waikato. She has worked at NZME for 10 years and has been a journalist for 21.
