Interventions
Intervention on Mercury-Added Cosmetics
Presented by Chinkie Peliño-Golle, EcoWaste Coalition and IPEN
Thank you, Mr. President. I am speaking on behalf of the EcoWaste Coalition in the Philippines and IPEN.
The COP5 decision to completely ban mercury in cosmetics was historic for health and the environment. By removing the 1 ppm threshold in products like skin-lightening creams and soaps, Parties made clear: no mercury belongs in cosmetics.
Yet, mercury-added products still circulate in markets and online, putting users’ health at risk and contaminating the environment. This undermines the Convention’s credibility and its promise to protect people and the planet.
The Secretariat’s report highlights key challenges: weak national legislation, poor enforcement, limited capacity, low awareness, and the need for stronger global cooperation. Civil society contributes to addressing these gaps through market monitoring, public alerts, and awareness campaigns. However, the need for full and strict enforcement remains uneven, and accountability is weak.
We urge Parties to fully enforce the zero-mercury standard, strengthen market and customs surveillance, and sustain public education campaigns that protect consumers and promote acceptance of all natural skin tones. Civil society stands ready to contribute to advancing the global mercury ban from commitment to concrete change in people’s lives.
Thank you.
Intervention on Mercury in Skin-Lightening Creams
Presented by Semia Gharbi, Association for Environmental Education for Future Generations
Mr. President, Distinguished delegates,
The Association for Environmental Education for Future Generations (AEEFG), a member of the International Pollutants Elimination Network (IPEN), expresses its deep concern about the continued use of mercury in cosmetics, particularly in skin-lightening creams, which remains one of the major sources of human exposure to mercury across the African continent.
Recent studies indicate that over 25% of skin-lightening products sold in African markets contain mercury concentrations exceeding the internationally permitted limit of 1 part per million (ppm), with some products reaching 30,000 ppm or more.
In Africa, women number approximately 583 million, more than half of the continent’s population, and they represent the population most exposed to these products. Estimates indicate that these products can contain 2 to 10% mercury by weight, meaning that tons of mercury may have accumulated in women’s bodies over decades.
Regular use of mercury-containing cosmetics can cause kidney damage, skin discoloration, anxiety, depression, peripheral neuropathy, and reduced immune resistance.
Mercury exposure may not be limited to the user alone; children and the developing fetus can also be exposed to mercury due to maternal use of these products.
It should be noted that accumulation of mercury in the body together with other toxic elements, such as lead or cadmium, can significantly increase health risks, causing multiple toxic effects on the liver, kidneys, and nervous system, as well as skin cancer and chronic diseases, reinforcing the need for extreme caution.
The widespread availability of these products on unregulated online markets worsens the situation, as it facilitates access to women and girls without any protection or oversight, further multiplying health and environmental risks.
In line with the objectives of the Minamata Convention on Mercury (Article 3), which aims to protect human health and the environment from mercury hazards, and in accordance with Article 4 on mercury-added productsand Article 16 on health aspects, we emphasize the importance of:
- An urgent and immediate ban on the use of mercury in all cosmetics and personal hygiene products, which leads to a global call to prohibit the trade and supply of mercury.
- Strengthening national legislation and enforcement to prevent the import and circulation of mercury-added products;
Protecting the health of African women—and women everywhere in the world—from mercury exposure is not only a legal obligation but also a responsibility toward a future free of toxins.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Intervention on Extension of Exemptions
Presented by Yuyun Ismawati, IPEN Co-chair
Thank you, Mr President.
I am speaking on behalf of IPEN.
Twelve years after the Minamata Convention was adopted, countries have more than five years to prepare the necessary consultations and regulatory reviews related to mercury, as agreed in the treaty. Parties also have more than enough time to prepare the relevant sectors to gradually phase out and eliminate the use of mercury in their territory.
It was disappointing that six countries registered exemptions until 2030 for Annex B, and three countries submitted extensions for Annex A. Some countries that requested exemptions have received projects and programs from donors and the GEF, including those facilitated by the WHO, UNDP, and other agencies, to control, eliminate, and phase out mercury. We observed and appreciated that many parties have already successfully ended the use of mercury in products and processes listed in Annex A and Annex B without looking for excuses.
We also observed that some countries are still importing mercury using the exemptions granted by the Convention to manufacture products and processes listed in Annexes A and B. However, they also export mercury to ASGM countries, either from the recovery process of importing illegally.
IPEN calls for the Secretariat to provide exemption forms for parties who submitted the request for exemptions, to explain and provide information about the source of mercury they imported or used in the manufacturing sector. Additionally, we would like to see parties post the registered mercury importers and exporters to their countries, including the requirement to have a safe interim storage of elemental mercury before it is distributed to the producers. We would also like to see how parties control the emissions and releases from the manufacturing sector in the exemption requests. Lastly, we have one question: Are we serious about making mercury history?
Thank you, Mr President
Intervention on ASGM
Presented by Yuyun Ismawati, IPEN Co-chair
Thank you, Mr President.
Twelve years after the Minamata Convention was adopted, countries have more than five years to prepare the necessary consultations and regulatory reviews related to mercury, as agreed in the treaty. Parties also have more than enough time to prepare the relevant sectors to gradually phase out and eliminate the use of mercury in their territory.
It was disappointing that six countries registered exemptions until 2030 for Annex B, and three countries submitted extensions for Annex A. Some countries that requested exemptions have received projects and programs from donors and the GEF, including those facilitated by the WHO, UNDP, and other agencies, to control, eliminate, and phase out mercury. We observed and appreciated that many parties have already successfully ended the use of mercury in products and processes listed in Annex A and Annex B without looking for excuses.
We also observed that some countries are still importing mercury using the exemptions granted by the Convention to manufacture products and processes listed in Annexes A and B. However, they also export mercury to ASGM countries, either from the recovery process of importing illegally.
IPEN calls for the Secretariat to provide exemption forms for parties who submitted the request for exemptions, to explain and provide information about the source of mercury they imported or used in the manufacturing sector. Additionally, we would like to see parties post the registered mercury importers and exporters to their countries, including the requirement to have a safe interim storage of elemental mercury before it is distributed to the producers. We would also like to see how parties control the emissions and releases from the manufacturing sector in the exemption requests. Lastly, we have one question: Are we serious about making mercury history?
Thank you, Mr President
Intervention on Mercury Waste
Presented by Griffins Ochieng, Centre for Environment Justice and Development
Thank you, Mr. President. I am from Centre for Environment Justice and Development, a participating organization of IPEN. I make this intervention on behalf of IPEN.
IPEN was disappointed with the waste threshold outcome at COP 5, as a clause was inserted in the final decision which undermined what was supposedly a globally harmonised threshold of 15 mg/kg. The clause, in effect, said that parties may use the 15 mg/kg threshold or any other value they choose.
This has the potential to create many different values worldwide to define mercury waste leading to exports of materials that avoid the ‘mercury waste’ classification and associated import/export declarations. Parties may be importing materials without being aware they are mercury waste when compared to the 15 mg/kg threshold. A global agreement should have a single harmonised value for the threshold definition of waste contaminated with mercury.
In addition, some parties have submitted information on their mercury waste management systems to the Implementation and Compliance Committee who have noted that there is a lack of mercury waste treatment facilities among parties which increases the prospect of environmentally unsound outcomes.
The draft decision before this COP contains an important element which is to establish a process to prepare for the review of mercury waste thresholds. This is an important opportunity to review the problematic clause that allows any party to choose any value to define mercury waste. Parties should consider removing the exemption that allows a country to use any threshold values and adopt a single globally harmonised threshold value of 15 mg/kg.
Intervention on National Reporting
Presented by Chinkie Peliño-Golle, EcoWaste Coalition
Thank you, Mr President. I am speaking on behalf of IPEN.
We welcome that some national reports under Article 21 show progress in phasing out mercury, including prohibiting its use in ASGM. But challenges remain. Parties must fully prohibit mercury in ASGM, set and enforce clear deadlines, and tackle smuggling and informal trade. Stronger commitments, backed by legislation, enforcement, transparency, and publicly accessible data, are essential.
We urge Parties that national reports should go beyond the template of compliance summaries. The report must include:
- Measures for the environmentally sound management, storage, and final disposal of mercury waste, and plans to characterise, identify, and clean up contaminated sites;
- Actions taken to prevent and address illegal trade and smuggling;
- Clear timelines for mercury phase-out in ASGM and support for mercury-free methods, including funding, technology transfer, and capacity building;
- Meaningful participation of affected communities, women, Indigenous Peoples, and civil society; and
- Collaboration with other Parties to establish a regional task force for cross-border cooperation, information exchange, and enforcement.
We also call on Parties to provide civil society access to these reports to verify progress, share on-the-ground data, and identify gaps. Transparency and inclusivity are vital to build trust and ensure no one is left behind in the journey to a mercury-free future.
Let us turn reporting into real action, transforming commitments on paper into lasting protection for people, communities, and our planet.
Thank you.
Intervention on the Gender Action Plan
Presented by IPEN co-chair Gohar Khojayan
Thank you, Mr. President.
IPEN welcomes the review of the activities during the biennium 2024–2025 to implement the gender action plan, which was prepared by the Secretariat for this meeting. IPEN supports the activities to address the mercury-related health concerns of women, children, and other sensitive populations in the biennium 2026–2027.
The implementation of the Gender Action Plan will address the specific concerns of women in relation to mercury pollution impacts and increase engagement of women leaders in the Mercury Treaty deliberations. Specific actions that Parties could take include introducing gender- and sex-disaggregated data indicators in National Implementation Plans (NIPs)/National Action Plans (NAPs); collecting information from Parties and other stakeholders on capacity-building needs with respect to mercury exposure of women and children; and other activities.
The importance of the enhanced role of women in engagement with the Treaty and its implementation cannot be understated. The women’s caucus of the Treaty has an important role to advance the equality and empowerment of women. Participation of women is essential to ensure cross-cutting issues are addressed and marginalized populations are heard.
In 2017, the UNEP and IPEN launched a partnership at UNEA-3 to focus on Gender and Chemicals. IPEN strongly supports more activities and funding to ensure that women have a much more prominent role in the Mercury Treaty and other related chemicals and waste agreements.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Intervention on Effectiveness Evaluation
Presented by Semia Gharbi, IPEN Steering Committee member
Mr. President, I speak on behalf of (IPEN), a member of the Open-Ended Scientific Group (OESG).
We are pleased to express our full support for the ongoing work on the Effectiveness Evaluation (EE) of the Minamata Convention on Mercury.
Preliminary results indicate that the work is progressing in a systematic manner, based on sound scientific data that also includes mercury trade and supply, as well as progress made in national reporting in accordance with Article 7.
The initial findings also show that, despite restrictions and bans on mercury in several countries, trade for ASGM has not declined, and mercury levels in the southern hemisphere have not yet decreased.
Tracking the sources of mercury and studying its complex environmental cycle—from emissions to deposition and re-emission—demonstrate that the legacy of mercury pollution will persist for decades to come. This makes it difficult for the evaluation process to trace all pathways unless decisive measures are taken to end trade and new uses.
We also emphasize that the currently available data are largely concentrated in developed countries, highlighting the urgent need to strengthen data collection from countries in the Global South, particularly in regions where artisanal and small-scale gold mining (ASGM) occurs.
In conclusion, IPEN reaffirms its support for the draft decision and commends the scientific efforts made thus far to ensure that the Minamata Convention remains an effective instrument for protecting human health and the environment from mercury.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Intervention on Mercury and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework
Presented by Gohar Khojayan, IPEN co-Chair
Thank you, Mr. President.
Mercury has been used to extract gold for centuries. In the last 50 years, we have seen the proliferation of ASGM using mercury in biodiversity-rich areas. Elemental mercury is transformed into a more toxic and persistent organic form through a methylation process, which occurs with the assistance of bacteria primarily found in wet environments. Methylmercury can then accumulate within the food web, leading to biomagnification and widespread contamination of ecosystems.
IPEN welcomes the draft road map, including possible actions and indicators, to support the co-benefits arising from implementing the Minamata Convention and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. In particular, IPEN supports the suggested effectiveness evaluation indicator 1 (levels and trends of mercury and mercury compounds in the environment and in humans due to anthropogenic emissions and releases), and indicator 29 (mercury levels in vulnerable human populations), which could also serve as additional indicators under target 7 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.
Possible actions of the draft road map include specific reports on global mercury levels for the Secretariat to present at the seventeenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity.
The draft decision encourages parties with ASGM NAPs to integrate action to reduce mercury pollution from artisanal and small-scale gold mining into national biodiversity strategies and action plans aligned with the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. This will enhance the co-benefits from implementing the Minamata Convention and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework by 2030.
IPEN supports the draft decision integrating aspects of the mercury treaty and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.
Thank you, Mr. President.
IPEN Closing Statement
Thank you, Mr President,
IPEN congratulations the COP on its decision to phase out dental amalgam by 2034. It has been a long journey to reach this critical point in negotiations. A good deal of the credit for this decision must be extended to the dedicated campaign spearheaded for over a decade by the World Alliance for Mercury-Free Dentistry, supported by many IPENers and other civil society organisations working on mercury pollution issues.
While that decision was a highlight of the COP, IPEN was disappointed at the lack of more ambitious action on the growing crisis of mercury contamination and human exposure in ASGM regions, especially in the Amazon basin. Indigenous Peoples are bearing the brunt of this mercury pollution crisis and have repeatedly spoken at this COP for stronger action to ban mercury use in the Amazon and protect their lands and their people. ASGM regions in Africa and Asia are experiencing similar impacts.
It has become clear that the convention has not been effective at significantly reducing mercury use in ASGM. To paraphrase the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Toxics, Dr Marcos Orellana – ‘it is time to close the gaps’ in the convention by amending the text to prohibit the global trade in mercury, accelerate the phase out of primary mining and establish a phase out date to end ASGM as an allowable use of mercury.
This will be a challenging process, but parties must show the courage and determination to make these amendment proposals for COP 7. The time has come to significantly strengthen the Convention to combat the threat of mercury use in ASGM sites. If we want to make mercury history, it is inevitable that these actions must be taken. Let us begin the process at COP 7.