编者按：近日，非洲公园网络特使、大象保护计划特别顾问、联合国《濒危野生动植物种国际贸易公约》(CITES) 上一届秘书长约翰·斯坎伦 (John Scanlon) 先生与中国绿发会反盗猎工作组的小伙伴们分享了他在东盟议会联盟大会(AIPA) 的最新发言。每次读他的作品都让我们颇受启发，尽管这篇文章中并不是所有观点都完全认可，仍感觉受益良多。我们认为倾听国际前沿声音有利于推动中国深度参与全球环境治理，有鉴于此，现将全文翻译分享于中国绿发会平台，供有关方面参考。
东盟议会联盟（ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Assembly, 简称AIPA），是一个成立于1977年的地区议会组织，代表东盟各国议会，是文莱、柬埔寨、印度尼西亚、老挝、马来西亚、缅甸、菲律宾、新加坡、泰国和越南等国议员之间的交流和信息中心。AIPA旨在鼓励成员国议会以及观察员国议会和其他议会组织之间的理解、合作和密切关系，配合解决地区问题，交流信息与立法经验，为各成员国政府实现共同目标创造条件。
按/Linda 译/洪珮嘉 核/绿会反盗猎工作组 编/Angel
ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Assembly (AIPA) - Wildlife Trade, Origins of COVID-19, & Preventing Future Pandemics
东盟议会联盟（AIPA）：野生动物贸易，新冠肺炎病毒起源，以及预防下一场大流行病
ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Assembly (AIPA) 东盟各国议会大会
Virtual Caucus Hearing 核心小组线上听证会
“Wildlife Trade, Origins of COVID-19, and Preventing Future Pandemics”
“野生动物贸易，新冠肺炎病毒起源，以及预防下一场大流行病”
2020年6月18日
John E. Scanlon AO – oral testimony
约翰·斯坎伦 口头证词
（供图：John Scanlon）
Sincere thanks to the Chair, Hon. Nguyen Tuan Anh, for convening this Conservation Caucus and to our good colleagues at the International Conservation Caucus Foundation (ICCF), for facilitating this virtual hearing. Apologies for my appearance but its close to 4.00 am here in Switzerland!
诚挚感谢尊敬的主席Nguyen Tuan Anh召开此次环境保护核心小组会议，感谢国际环境保护核心小组基金会（ICCF）的同事协助召开此次会议。现在是瑞士时间将近凌晨4点，本人仪容若有不当之处还请谅解。
The COVID-19 pandemic has reminded us in a devastating way of the interconnected nature of things, most particularly between economies, the environment, human and wildlife health and welfare. However, our international laws, programmes and funds do not yet reflect this reality, which is also largely the case at the national level.
新冠肺炎疫情以残酷的方式提醒着我们，世间万物是紧密联系的，特别突显各经济体、环境、人类和野生动物健康及福利之间是密不可分的。但是我们的国际法、国际项目和基金却并没有体现这一联系，在国别层面上亦然。
The most likely explanation for COVID-19 is that the virus jumped from bats to humans, perhaps via another animal such as a pangolin, at a wet market in Wuhan. While no firm conclusions can yet be drawn, the links between wildlife and previous epidemics and pandemics are well-known[i], as are the conditions that make spillover from animals to humans more likely. You have just heard from experts on these issues.
新冠病毒肺炎被认为可能源自武汉的一个“wet market”，病毒从蝙蝠转移到人身上，或是通过其他动物，比如通过一只穿山甲，转移到人身上。但目前还没有任何证据表明这一猜想的真实性。我们都了解野生动物与过往的流行病之间的联系[1]，在什么情况下病毒更容易从动物转移到人类身上。专家们已经谈论过此话题。
The risks are real, and the stakes are high. Risks to public health through wildlife-related zoonotic diseases can come from unregulated, regulated, and illegal wildlife trade. We need to draw on relevant experts to identify the wildlife markets, trade and consumption that poses a health risk, so we can focus our efforts where they are needed most, and avoid any unintended consequences.
风险确切存在，代价十分高昂。与野生动物有关的人畜共患疾病带给公众健康的风险，可能源自不受监管的、受管控的、以及非法的野生动物贸易。我们需要带动相关领域的专家，来识别会威胁人类健康的野生动物交易市场、贸易以及消费行为，如此才能将人力物力集中在最需要的地方，避免任何意外后果。
The current international regime for regulating wildlife trade and combating wildlife crime is inadequate both for regulating the wildlife trade, markets and consumption that pose a risk to public health, as well as for ending wildlife crime.
目前的野生动物贸易国际监管机制和打击野生动物犯罪国际体系还不足以管控会威胁人类健康的野生动物交易市场、贸易以及消费行为，也不能够终止野生动物犯罪。
Left as it is our system is not going to prevent the next pandemic. It could, in fact, be raising our potential exposure to zoonotic diseases that can spill over from wild animals to people.
我们的体系还不足以预防下一场大流行病，甚至可能会提高我们接触野生动物身上人畜共患病的几率。
These are challenging, global, interconnected, issues. Profound changes are needed, and it will require a collective effort to adequately address them.
这些议题极具挑战性，具有国际影响力并且互相联系。我们需要深刻变革，为了有效解决这些问题，我们还需齐心协力。
Wildlife trade
野生生物贸易
As regards wildlife trade, CITES is the global legal instrument that regulates international trade. Its decisions are based upon agreed trade and biological criteria. It does not include risks to public health, or animal health, in its decision making, including in listing a species or in approving any trade transactions. For example, pangolins are listed under CITES, horseshoe bats[ii], along with many other bat species, are not.
在野生动植物贸易方面，《濒危野生动植物种国际贸易公约》（CITES）是管理国际野生动物贸易的国际法工具。《公约》下的决议是基于事先协商好的贸易及生物标准。《公约》在决策时（比如制定附录名单或批准交易）并不考虑其对公共健康或动物健康的威胁。例如，该《公约》附录里列出了穿山甲，但菊头蝠[2]和其它种类的蝙蝠却不在该公约附录名单内。
CITES trade controls only address overexploitation[iii], namely whether a trade transaction will threaten the survival of that species. CITES narrow focus on overexploitation was sound when the Convention was negotiated in the early 1970’s, but it cannot be sustained in a post COVID-19 world. Today we need to take a ‘One Health’ approach to wildlife trade.[iv]
该《公约》的贸易监管工具只关注资源过度开发[3]的问题，也就是说，某次交易是否会威胁该物种的生存。该《公约》的单一关注点在20世纪70年代初期，也就是在制定《公约》的时期里显得十分合理，但这一关注点在“后新冠时代”将不再可行。今日我们需要采取一种“同一健康”的方针来管理野生动物贸易[4]。
At the present time, some States[v] are taking stricter domestic measures to ban certain wildlife trade, markets and consumption, as a precautionary measure, which is to be welcomed. However, to be effective, such measures will need to be applied and enforced across all countries to stave off future pandemics.
目前有些国家[5]通过采取更严格的措施，管控野生动物贸易、市场和消费。将此作为预防措施，我们十分鼓励这类做法。但为了真正行之有效，这些措施应该在全球范围内应用、实施，才能避免下一场大流行病。
To achieve this objective, we need to work within an open, transparent, science-based international legal framework that includes health criteria in its decision-making process. This does not exist today, either under CITES or anywhere else.
为达成此目标，我们需要在一个公开、透明、有科学依据的国际法律框架下合作，该框架在决策中应考虑健康标准。目前我们在《公约》内和其他机制里都还没有这样的框架。
As I see it, there are three options at international level to build public and animal health into wildlife trade laws. We can:
在我看来，国际层面有三种方法可以将公共健康和动物健康因素纳入野生动物贸易法律。
- amend CITES;[vi]
- 修订《濒危野生动植物种国际贸易公约》（CITES）[6]；
- create a new Protocol under the Convention on Biological Diversity; or[vii]
- 在《生物多样性公约》（CBD）下制定新议定书；或[7]
- create a new Agreement under the World Health Organisation.[viii]
- 在世界卫生组织下制定新协议[8]。
I have looked closely at all three options, and in my view, amending CITES will be the fastest, most effective, and cost-efficient route to take in achieving a One Health approach to regulating wildlife trade.
认真考虑了这三种方法后，我认为，若想在监管野生动物贸易方面采取“同一健康”的方针，修订《公约》是最快、最有效、成本最低的方案。
CITES Parties have been creative over many years in how they have interpreted the Convention and they have, through their decisions, enabled the Convention to evolve quite considerably.[ix] Some people have asked me if we can achieve a One Health objective without having to amend the Convention text itself.
多年来，《公约》缔约国各自对公约内容有不同的创新解读，并通过在各国内实施相关措施，帮助《公约》不断改进[9]。曾有人问我，在不修订《公约》内容的前提下，能不能达成“同一健康”的目标。
CITES Parties could adopt a suite of new or revised Resolutions and decisions that address health-related issues, establish new cooperative agreements with relevant agencies, and strengthen the implementation of existing agreements, in order to move CITES closer towards taking a One Health approach to wildlife trade.[x]
《公约》缔约国可以采用一系列新设或修订后的决议，这些决议应着手解决健康相关的议题，与相关机构签订新合作协议，加强当前协议的落实，这都是为了让《公约》在野生生物贸易管理方面更接近“同一健康”方针[10]。
These measures could offer valuable guidance to Parties and support enhanced working relationships with relevant agencies at all levels, but there are limits to what such guidance can achieve, and it could not change the core mandate of the Convention.
以上措施可为缔约国提供宝贵的指导方针，全方位增强与相关机构的合作关系。但这些指导方针能取得的成果依然有限，也没有改变《公约》的核心工作。
If public and animal health is to become an integral part of the legally binding wildlife trade regime under CITES, then the Convention text will need to be amended, along with certain Resolutions, and there is a clear process for doing both.
若使公共健康和动物健康成为《公约》下管理野生动物贸易法律框架中的一部分，就必须修订《公约》内容及部分决议。现已有清晰明确的修订程序。
Wildlife crime
野生动植物犯罪
On wildlife crime, we have known for some time now that serious wildlife crime is organised, transnational, is fuelled by corruption, and has a devastating impact on wildlife, local communities, national economies, security, public health and entire ecosystems, but this is now increasingly obvious.
在野生动物犯罪方面，我们已经知道严重的野生动物犯罪往往是有组织的、跨国界的、受不正当利益驱动的，对野生动物、当地社群、社会经济、国家安全、公共健康以及整个生态系统都有毁灭性的影响，且正变得越来越明显。
Yet, remarkably, there is no global legal agreement on wildlife crime.
但令人匪夷所思的是，我们在野生动物犯罪方面却没有国际法律协定。
In the absence of any alternative, we have used CITES to crank up the fight against illegal wildlife trade, and with some success. However, CITES was never designed to deal with wildlife crime and its limitations as a trade-related, rather than a crime-related convention, in combating serious wildlife crimes are now clearly evident.
目前还没有可以代替《公约》的体系，我们利用《公约》框架加大对非法野生动物贸易的打击，已取得一定成果。但是，《公约》并不是为应对野生动植物犯罪而生，《公约》是一个围绕贸易，而不是犯罪的体系，在打击严重的野生动物贸易方面它的局限性显而易见。
This is perhaps best illustrated by the fact that record levels of illegal trade in pangolins have been recorded over the past two years, despite them being given the highest level of protection under the Convention in 2016.[xi]
其中最明显体现的是过去两年内，穿山甲非法贸易破纪录式增长，而穿山甲恰巧是《公约》自2016年来保护力度最大的动物[11]。
（供图：John Scanlon）
The 2019 UN IPBES Global Assessment tells us that one million species are at risk of extinction over coming decades if we do not change course. This Report, and others, make it clear that we must look beyond CITES listed species, which accounts for only 36,000, or 0.5%, of the world’s eight million species. We must use the law to help countries stop the theft of all their wildlife, both plants and animals, terrestrial and marine, not just those species that are on the brink of extinction.
联合国生物多样性和生态系统服务政府间科学-政策平台（IPBES）在2019年发表了全球评估，评估结果告诉我们，如果不采取行动，在未来几十年内全球将约有一百万物种濒临灭绝。该报告和其他类似报告为我们敲响警钟，我们不应只局限于《公约》附录名单里的物种。全球约有800万种生物，但CITES附录名单只涵盖了3.6万种，约占0.5%。我们必须利用法律工具帮助各国终止所有盗取野生物种的行为，包括植物和野生动物（无论是陆生还是海洋的），而不应只关注濒临灭绝的物种。
We must finally grasp the nettle with serious wildlife crime and put combating such crimes where it belongs. We must embed it into the international criminal law framework, which can be done via a new Protocol to the UN Convention against Transnational Organised Crime, as has been done for other serious crimes, such as human trafficking.
我们必须大刀阔斧地解决野生动物犯罪问题，给予其足够重视。我们必须将此纳入国际刑法框架内，效仿管控其他严重犯罪行为（比如人口贩卖）的措施，在联合国打击跨国有组织犯罪公约下签订新的议定书。
Further, with new bans on high-risk wildlife markets and the trade in and consumption of certain wildlife on public health grounds, the need for an effective global enforcement response is greater than ever. If not, such markets and trade may simply move underground, which will exacerbate rather than diminish the health risks.
还有，目前在高风险野生动物交易市场、以及可能影响公共健康的野生动物交易和消费行为方面已经有新禁令，我们亟需一套高效的全球执法应对机制。如果没有这类机制，相关市场和交易就可能转入地下，往往会加重而不是减轻公共安全危机。
A new wildlife crime Protocol could, amongst other matters, embed combating wildlife crime into the criminal justice system, enhance cooperation across international borders, facilitate making best use of the tools available under the UN Convention in combating wildlife crime, extend the global scope of wildlife crime beyond the trafficking of species listed under CITES, provide a common definition of wildlife crime and set out what conduct should be criminalised.
制定新的野生动物犯罪议定书，能将打击野生动物犯罪和其他事项纳入犯罪司法体系里，增强跨国合作，在打击野生动物犯罪方面推动更好利用联合国公约框架下的工具，扩大打击全球野生动物犯罪的视野，不仅局限于走私《公约》附录名单物种，给野生动物犯罪下一个通用定义，规定何种行为应被定罪。
Protect wildlife at source
从源头上保护野生动物
Wherever possible, it is best to take measures to stop the illegal taking, trade and consumption of wildlife before it ever happens, by better protecting wildlife at source and its habitat.
只要有可能，我们应通过加大力度保护野生动物及其栖息地，在非法盗猎、交易和消费野生动物的行为发生前采取措施阻止它。
When they have a stake in it, local communities are the best protectors of wildlife, before it ever enters illegal trade, and in doing so they are also helping to avert the next wildlife-related pandemic.[xii]
当这些行为与当地居民的利益息息相关时，作为野生动物的最佳保护者，他们可以帮助阻止野生动物进入非法交易链。由此帮助预防下一场与野生动物有关的大流行病[12]。
We need to focus our collective efforts around large-scale, long-term commitments to wildlife-rich places that are included in protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, and that can deliver multiple benefits.[xiii]
我们应在涵盖范围广、长期有效的承诺下通力合作，重点关注受保护以及其他有效的当地保护措施管辖内的野生生物资源丰富地区，以及关注可以带来切实成果的地区[13]。
When well-managed, these areas provide security for people and wildlife and bring about stability and law and order, creating the conditions needed to attract tourism, secure carbon, combat poaching, protect biodiversity, and create decent local jobs in remote areas. I’ve seen for myself across multiple countries, including in the DRC.
只要管理恰当，这些地区能保证人们和野生动物的安全，带来稳定和法律秩序，并创造条件吸引游客、降低碳排放量、打击盗猎行为、保护生物多样性，以及在偏远地区创造体面的工作机会。我已经在许多国家见证过这些成果，比如刚果民主共和国。
Today, we better understand the multiple benefits of nature conservation, yet these benefits are not sufficiently recognised by health, development or security initiatives or their financing. As the benefits of effective nature conservation extends well beyond wildlife, so too must the sources of financing.
今天我们更加深刻地理解了自然保护的益处，但健康、发展或安全方面的倡议或资助并没有足够体现这种认识。既然有效的自然保护措施所带来的益处不仅限于野生动物，融资来源也不应局限于此。
Chair, if we manage to take these actions[xiv], I believe we will be well placed to avert the next wildlife-related pandemic, but if we do not act boldly now to institutionalise the changes that are needed to laws, funding and programmes, I fear we may find ourselves back in the same place in the not too distant future.
尊敬的主席，如果我们有办法采取这些行动[14]，我相信我们将足以避免下一场与野生动物相关的大流行病。但是我们如果不采取大胆行动，将相关法律的修订、相关基金和项目制度化，我担心未来我们可能再次陷入与如今相同的境地。
Thank you for the invitation to address you and my brief remarks are supplemented by reference materials that have been provided for you via our good colleagues at the ICCF.
感谢您邀请我发言，我的证词内容参考了部分材料，这些材料已经通过国际环境保护核心小组基金会（ICCF）的同事发送给您。
John E. Scanlon AO 约翰·斯坎伦
Special Envoy, African Parks 非洲公园网络特使
Special Adviser, Elephant Protection Initiative 大象保护计划特别顾问
Chair, Global Initiative to End Wildlife Crime 终止野生动物犯罪全球倡议主席
Immediate past Secretary-General, CITES (2010-2018) 《濒危野生动植物种国际贸易公约》上一任秘书长（2010-2018）
【参考资料】
[i] Such as HIV-AIDS, Ebola, MERS, SARS and more
[1]比如艾滋病、埃博拉病毒、中东呼吸综合征、非典等
[ii] A likely source of the COVID-19 pandemic.
[2]新型冠状病毒的可能来源
[iii] There are some trades that also address a limited number of animal welfare issues, such as for trade in live animals, where Management Authorities must be satisfied it is prepared and shipped to minimise the risk of injury, damage to health and cruel treatment.
[3]有些贸易还解决了有限的动物福利问题，例如活体动物贸易必须满足濒管办的要求，运输活体动物应有适当准备，应最大程度地减少对其的身体健康的损害以及虐待行为。
[iv] Which seeks to bring public, animal and plant health and the environment closer together
[4]“同一健康”的方针寻求将公共健康、动植物健康以及环境紧密联系在一起。
[v] As we have seen in China, Vietnam, Gabon and Bolivia.
[5]比如目前中国、越南、加蓬和玻利维亚采取的措施。
[vi] To include public health criteria for listing species, possibly via a new Appendix, create a new Committee on Public Heath, and oblige Management Authorities to take account of public health issues before issuing any certificate or permit.
[6]在制定物种附录时涵盖公共健康标准，可以通过新增附录，建立新的公共健康委员会，使濒管办在下发证明或许可前必须考虑公共健康问题等方法实现。
[vii] As has been done for Living Modified Organisms and Access and Benefit Sharing.
[7]正如之前我们为《改性活生物体及遗传资源获取与惠益分享》制定新议定书。
[viii] As has been done for Tobacco Control, which recognises the serious public health consequences of tobacco.
[8]正如之前人们因意识到烟草对公共健康的严重危害而制定控制烟草的协议。
[ix] This has included adopting Resolutions to:
- establish three committees, including two science committees,
- create a compliance mechanism,
- advance the fight against illegal trade in CITES listed species,
- call for the closure domestic ivory markets in certain circumstances,
- address certain animal welfare concerns, and
- support the Secretariat collaborating with other agencies and programmes, as was done with the OIE, the World Animal Health Organisation, in 2015.
[9]修订决议包括：
- 建立三个委员会，其中包括两个科学委员会；
- 创设规则遵守机制；
- 加强打击CITES附录物种的非法交易；
- 在特定情况下呼吁关闭国内象牙市场；
- 解决某些动物福利问题；以及
- 支持秘书处与其他机构或项目建立合作，比如在2015年时与世界动物卫生组织（OIE）建立合作关系。
[x] For example the Parties could adopt decisions to supplement the expertise on its committees, encourage Management Authorities to consider the health aspects of any trade before authorising it, offer better guidance on captive breeding facilities, extend the reach of guidelines on the transport of live animals to cover capture and management prior to transport, and to engage in deeper or new cooperative agreements with public and animal health agencies.
[10]比如缔约国可以通过相关决议，为委员会补充专家力量，鼓励濒管办在授权任何行为前考虑健康因素，更好指导动物圈养繁殖设施，扩大活体动物运输管理条例的管理范围，增加对运输前的动物捕捉和处理的管理，与公共健康或动物健康机构达成更深层次或新的协议。
[xi] Pangolins are also a possible intermediate host of COVID-19.
[11]穿山甲也可能是新型冠状肺炎病毒的中间宿主之一。
[xii] Wildlife-based tourism revenue is a critical part of the financing of nature conservation especially in developing countries. This current loss of revenue, and related jobs, is seriously challenging wildlife protection efforts, and could lead to an increase in poaching, degradation of ecosystems, and instability, thereby increasing the threat posed by high-risk wildlife trade, and exacerbating the effects of climate change. We must find a way to bridge this financing gap, which is addressed in your next session.
[12]以野生生物资源为主的旅游业收入是自然保护筹资的关键部分，特别是在发展中国家。目前这方面的收入减少和相关工作人员下岗，正严重挑战野生动植物保护工作，可能导致更多盗猎行为、生态系统退化加剧和不稳定性上升，从而增加高风险野生动物贸易带来的威胁，加剧气候变化现象。我们必须找到弥合这一资金缺口的方法，下届会议将解决这一问题。
[xiii] The proposed German Legacy Landscape Fund and the UK’s Biodiverse Landscape Fund both adopt this approach, which is most welcome, but the funding is limited
[13]在德国建立的风景遗产基金会和英国的生物多样性风景基金会都已采取此类措施，值得我们鼓励，但他们的运营资金十分有限。
[xiv] It’s important to also note that to be as effective as possible, all these efforts will need to be complemented by well-targeted demand reduction campaigns, and, where necessary, initiatives to provide alternative sources of protein and livelihoods to people severely affected by any bans. Traditional, subsistence practices use should not be impacted.
[14]值得注意的是，若想让这些措施卓有成效，所有措施都应通过定位精准的需求降低行动来实施，若条件允许，也可通过一些倡议，为受禁令严重影响的群体提供其他蛋白质和生计来源。传统的维持生计方法不应受影响。
原文链接：
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/asean-inter-parliamentary-assembly-aipa-wildlife-trade-scanlon-ao
翻译/洪珮嘉
审核/绿会“走出去”办公室
编/Angel
