By Faridat Salifu
Civil society constituencies at the UN climate negotiations in Bonn, Germany, have raised formal objections to what they describe as escalating censorship by the UNFCCC Secretariat targeting peaceful expressions of solidarity with Palestinians.
In an open letter shared with all Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) on Tuesday, June 24, 2025, the signatories accused the Secretariat of imposing arbitrary restrictions on civic space during SB62.
The letter was signed by the Women and Gender Constituency (WGC), the youth constituency YOUNGO, and two groups under the Environmental Non-Governmental Organisation (ENGO) banner: the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (DCJ) and Climate Action Network (CAN).
At the center of the protest is the Secretariat’s refusal to approve the use of the phrase “End the Siege” in banners and other materials for a planned solidarity action on Palestine, while reportedly allowing other phrases such as “end the genocide.”
Civil society groups argue that this selective prohibition reflects an inconsistent and politically influenced application of Secretariat rules, and say it contradicts broader United Nations positions on the crisis in Gaza.
Tasneem Essop, Executive Director of Climate Action Network International, criticized the Secretariat’s position, stating: “Let’s be clear: the UNFCCC Secretariat is not neutral – it’s policing civil society while the rest of the UN system… openly call for an end to the siege of Gaza.”
Essop added that when banners are censored for echoing language used by the UN Secretary-General and High Commissioner for Human Rights, “it’s not about rules – it’s about politics.”
The open letter, addressed to UNFCCC Parties and copied to the Secretariat, asserts that the restriction on the term “End the Siege” effectively amounts to tacit approval of ongoing human rights violations.
“Silence is not neutrality,” the letter reads. “To censor calls to ‘End the Siege’ is to condone it.”
Related Posts
The signatories also noted that a majority of UN member states—including many Parties to the UNFCCC—have backed resolutions at the UN General Assembly demanding a ceasefire and end to the blockade in Gaza.
They described the Secretariat’s justification of “maintaining a neutral and constructive environment” as incompatible with the current humanitarian context and international legal norms.
The letter stated that the Secretariat’s decision to suppress specific language aligned with UN human rights statements has undermined civil society trust and cast doubt on the integrity of the negotiation space.
“This is no longer a question of procedure or neutrality. It is picking a side,” the letter stated.
Civil society groups say they will no longer negotiate with the Secretariat on the terms of Palestine-related actions, declaring that further restrictions on speech will not be accepted.
They argue that the right to peaceful protest and expression must be protected under UN standards, especially in a space that claims to serve the interests of global justice and intergenerational equity.
The letter calls on Parties to the UNFCCC to take responsibility, noting that censorship decisions made by the Secretariat are done “in the name of Parties.”
It also warns that the Secretariat’s narrow interpretation of climate issues—separated from broader social and human rights concerns—risks rendering multilateral climate negotiations irrelevant to affected communities.
Citing language in the Paris Agreement that calls for the protection and promotion of human rights in climate action, the signatories urged governments to reaffirm civil society’s role and rights within the UNFCCC process.
They concluded by warning that multilateralism itself is at risk if fundamental freedoms and justice are excluded from climate spaces.
The controversy adds to growing civil society concerns about shrinking civic space within international environmental forums and the tension between procedural control and substantive justice in global climate governance.
