"This document would establish a very repressive system of world governance. The global elite believe that we are not smart enough to think for ourselves and that they need to run the entire planet like a tightly-controlled prison in order to save the environment."

Proposed UN Environmental Constitution For The World Would Establish An Incredibly Repressive System Of Global Governance

The American Dream

Most people have no idea that the United Nations has been drafting an environmental constitution for the world that is intended to supersede all existing national laws. This document has a working title of “Draft International Covenant on Environment and Development” and you can read the entire thing right here. Work on this proposed world environmental constitution has been going on since 1995, and the fourth edition was issued to UN member states on September 22nd, 2010. This document is intended to become a permanent binding treaty and it would establish an incredibly repressive system of global governance. This “covenant”, as it is being called, claims authority over the entire global environment and everything that affects it. Considering the fact that everything that we do affects the environment in some way, that would mean that this document would become the highest form of law for all human activity. This proposed UN environmental constitution for the world is incredibly detailed. The U.S. Constitution only has 7 articles, but the UN document has 79 articles. If the U.S. eventually ratifies this treaty, any national, state or local laws that conflict with this covenant will be null and void. This is potentially one of the greatest threats to our national sovereignty that we have ever seen and we need to warn the American people about it.

Essentially what this proposed environmental covenant does is it takes the sustainable development principles underlying Agenda 21 and turns them into global constitutional law.

All parties to this new constitution would be forced to turn their nations into centrally-planned societies where all decisions about everything are evaluated within the framework of sustainable development.

If the United States became a party to this treaty, America would become a paradise for control freaks. Basic decisions about what you eat, about what you wear, about where you live, about how big a family you can have and about what activities you could engage in on a daily basis would be dictated by the mandates in the global constitution.

If you doubt this, just read the document.

Let’s take a closer look at some of the wording in this proposed constitution for the world….

In documents such as these, drafters have learned to never use the term “global government” because it sets off alarm bells for people. So they often use the more politically-correct term of “governance”. On page 36, we are told that proper governance includes the creation of governing institutions on various levels “from the local to the global”….

“Governance is the process of decision-making and the process by which decisions are implemented (or not implemented). It also can be defined as the rational organization of society in order to achieve the objectives emerging from its common concerns emerging from material, economic, historical and cultural foundations and needs. Governance includes the creation and the functioning of institutions and of norms at various levels from the local to the global.”

In the forward to the document, we are told that the covenant is a “living document” that will serve as a blueprint for an international agreement that the authors hope will eventually be adopted by all members of the United Nations….

“The Draft Covenant is a blueprint for an international framework (or umbrella) agreement consolidating and developing existing legal principles related to environment and development. The intention is that it will remain a “living document” until – as is the hope and expectation of those who have been involved in the project – it is adopted as a basis for multilateral negotiations.”

This project was originally focused almost entirely on the environment, but the authors acknowledge that there has been an increased focus on the “social and economic pillars” in this latest edition….

“Special care was taken to update it with respect to the ‘social and economic pillars’ and thereby avoid falling into the trap of concentrating solely on the ‘environmental pillar’.”

In the preamble we are told that a “global partnership” is necessary in order to “achieve sustainable development”….

“…the belief that humanity currently stands at a decisive point in history, which calls for a global partnership to achieve sustainable development”

Article 3 of this proposed global constitution declares that the global environment should be under the “protection” of “international law”….

“The global environment is a common concern of humanity and under the protection of the principles of international law, the dictates of the public conscience and the fundamental values of humanity.”

Later on in the document, things start becoming more specific.

In Article 16, we are told that all member nations must integrate environmental conservation into all of their national decisions….

Parties shall, at all stages and at all levels, integrate environmental conservation into the planning and implementation of their policies and activities, giving full and equal consideration to environmental, economic, social and cultural factors. To this end, the Parties shall:

(a) conduct regular national reviews of environmental and developmental policies and plans;

(b) enact, periodically review, and enforce laws and regulations; and

(c) establish or strengthen institutional structures and procedures to integrate environmental and developmental issues in all spheres of decision-making.

In Article 20, we are told that parties to this treaty will be required to “mitigate the adverse effects of climate change”. That means that if this treaty is ratified in the United States, the national debate about climate change will be over and our national, state and local government institutions will all be required to actively fight man-made global warming whether it actually exists or not….

Parties shall take precautionary measures to protect the Earth’s climate system and mitigate the adverse effects of climate change. To these ends, they shall cooperate internationally inter alia to:

(a) Measure their emissions and implement nationally appropriate mitigation actions;

and

(b) Establish risk management and implement adaptation measures to enable climate-resilient development.

In Article 31, there is a requirement to eradicate poverty. Yes, everyone should work hard to eliminate poverty, but what this document envisions is a worldwide socialist system where wealth is redistributed on a global scale….

Parties, individually or in partnership with other States, international organizations and civil society, in particular the private economic sector, shall adopt measures aimed at the eradication of poverty, including measures to:

(a) legally empower people living in poverty to exercise their rights including the right to development;

(b) respect, ensure, promote and fulfill the rights of vulnerable and marginalized persons, in particular to food, water, housing and other basic needs;

(c) enable all individuals to achieve sustainable livelihoods, in particular by increasing access to and control over resources, including land;

(d) rehabilitate degraded resources, to the extent practicable, and promote sustainable use of resources for basic human needs;

(e) provide potable water and sanitation;

(f) provide education, with a particular focus on, and with the participation of women and girl children, indigenous peoples, local communities, and vulnerable or marginalized persons; and

(g) support microcredit and microinsurance schemes and the development of microfinance institutions and their capacities.

In the end, socialism always makes everyone poorer, but unfortunately the United Nations has apparently not gotten that memo yet.

In Article 32, there is a requirement to recycle “to the fullest extent possible“.

If the U.S. ratifies this global environmental constitution that means that there will be a lot more government agents snooping through our trash cans to make sure that we are recycling properly like is already happening in Cleveland, Ohio.

In Article 33, countries are required to determine “the size of the human population their environment is capable of supporting” and to implement measures to make sure that the population does not exceed that level….

Parties shall develop or strengthen demographic policies in order to achieve sustainable development. To this end, the Parties shall:

(a) conduct studies to estimate the size of the human population their environment is capable of supporting and develop programmes relating to population growth at corresponding levels;

(b) cooperate to alleviate the stress on natural support systems caused by major population flows;

(c) cooperate as requested to provide a necessary infrastructure on a priority basis for areas with rapid population growth;

(d) provide to their populations full information on the options concerning family planning;

and

(e) provide for long-term resettlement of persons displaced by changing environmental conditions.

As I have written about previously, the elites that are pushing sustainable development are obsessed with population control and they love death.

Article 33 is definitely one of the most chilling parts of the entire document.

In Article 34, nations are required to maintain “an open and non-discriminatory international trading system”. This document affirms the emerging one world economic system and sets out rules for how to participate in it in an environmentally responsible way….

1. Parties shall cooperate to establish and maintain an open and non-discriminatory international trading system that equitably meets the developmental and environmental needs of present and future generations.

To this end, Parties shall endeavour to ensure that:

(a) trade does not lead to the wasteful use of natural resources nor interfere with their conservation or sustainable use;

(b) trade measures addressing transboundary or global environmental problems are based, as far as possible, on international consensus;

(c) trade measures for environmental purposes do not constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on international trade;

(d) unilateral trade measures by importing Parties in response to activities which are harmful or potentially harmful to the environment outside the jurisdiction of such Parties are avoided as far as possible or occur only after consultation with affected States and are implemented in a transparent manner; and

(e) prices of commodities and raw materials reflect the full direct and indirect social and environmental costs of their extraction, production, transport, marketing, and, where appropriate, ultimate disposal.

In the commentary on Article 34, we are told that a one world economic system that respects the environment is “an essential component of sustainable development”….

Paragraph 1 sets out the duty to cooperate to establish and maintain an international economic system that ensures inter- and intra generational equity, giving effect to the principles enunciated in Articles 5 (Equity and Justice) and 10 (Right to Development) of the Draft Covenant. This duty has been recognized in recent international instruments as being an essential component of sustainable development.

In Article 41, nations are instructed to integrate sustainable development principles into all decisions regarding “infrastructure and town and country planning”….

Parties shall establish and implement integrated physical planning systems, including provisions for infrastructure and town and country planning, with a view to integrating conservation of the environment, including biological diversity, into social and economic development.

In Article 51, we learn how all of this is going to be paid for.

It turns out that we will be required to finance the implementation of all of these repressive new requirements….

1. Parties undertake to provide, in accordance with their capabilities, financial support and incentives for those national activities aimed at achieving the objectives of this Covenant.

2. Parties shall pursue innovative ways of generating public and private financial resources for sustainable development.

In Article 52, it even tells us how much of our national GDP we will be required to contribute….

Parties, taking into account their respective capabilities and specific national and regional developmental priorities, objectives and circumstances, shall endeavour to augment their aid programmes to reach the United Nations General Assembly target of at least 0.7 percent of Gross National Product for Official Development Assistance.

In Article 69, the International Court of Justice and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea are essentially designated the “judicial branch” for this global governance scheme….

1. Parties shall settle disputes concerning the interpretation or application of this Covenant by peaceful means, such as by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, and judicial settlement, and where appropriate, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or by any other peaceful means of their own choice.

2. If Parties to such a dispute do not reach agreement within one year following the notification by one Party to another that a dispute exists, the dispute shall, at the request of one of the Parties, be submitted to either an arbitral tribunal, including the Permanent Court of Arbitration, or to judicial settlement, including by the International Court of Justice and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea as appropriate.

Those that try to claim that this is not a proposed constitution for the world are simply being delusional. Article 71 even gives us detailed procedures for “amending” this constitution.

If this document is not intended to be a constitution, then why does it have a “preamble” like the U.S. Constitution does, why is it organized into “articles” like the U.S. Constitution is, and why does it set forth procedures for “amending” the document like the U.S. Constitution does?

And notice that the word “shall” is used constantly throughout the entire document. This proposed constitution does not contain “suggestions” that the authors hope will be followed. Rather, it contains commands which are intended to be obeyed.

This document would establish a very repressive system of world governance. The global elite believe that we are not smart enough to think for ourselves and that they need to run the entire planet like a tightly-controlled prison in order to save the environment.

Link:
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/proposed-un-environmental-constitution-for-the-world-would-establish-an-incredibly-repressive-system-of-global-governance