South Centre Inputs on Workstream III on dispute prevention and resolution (Co-Leads’ Draft Protocol on the Prevention and Resolution of Tax Disputes)
24 August 2026
The South Centre supports the development of an effective multilateral framework for the prevention and resolution of tax disputes. The Protocol should reflect the different capacities of States and provide sufficient flexibility for broad participation.
The Protocol should contain sufficient legal and procedural detail to provide a legal basis for mechanisms where none currently exist and to ensure coherence with mechanisms available under existing instruments. As such, the protocol itself should establish who can invoke it, when it applies, the obligations of competent authorities, and the relationship with existing instruments, and minimum procedural safeguards. Detailed operational procedures such as how an advance pricing arrangement (APA) or joint audit is conducted or mediator is appointed should be addressed through accompanying guidance issued by the Parties to the Protocol.
The protocol should cover the broad range of dispute-prevention mechanisms, but none should be mandatory, to allow flexibility given different State capacities.
The Mutual Agreement Procedures (MAPs) could constitute the core mechanism for the resolution of tax disputes under the Protocol, as it has a well-established basis in international tax practice.
The Protocol should not establish mandatory arbitration. Any arbitration mechanism, if retained, should be expressly voluntary and based on the consent of all competent authorities concerned.
The timelines provided in the protocol should be indicative rather than hard deadlines.
The protocol should provide for capacity building and technical assistance for the implementation.
South Centre Inputs on Workstream II on Taxation of Services (Co-Lead’s Draft Protocol on the Taxation of Income from Cross-Border Services)
26 August 2026
The South Centre welcomes the Draft Protocol on the Taxation of Income from Cross-Border Services and submits the following comments:
Scope: Cover all cross-border services broadly, not limiting it to technical and digital services alone, to avoid fragmentation.
Optionality: No reservations on key substantive provisions (Articles 5, 6, 7, 9); reservations permitted only for non-key administrative/procedural matters (e.g., rates, timelines).
Article 1. Subject to tax rule can apply to cross-border services income within Protocol scope, with the statutory rate fixed in the Protocol; extend paragraph 4’s residence state preservation to Articles 5–11.
Taxes covered: Exclude excise taxes.
Define “beneficial owner,” “payer,” “payment,” and “special relationship“; as applied in Articles 5 and 6.
The automated digital services list in Article 6(4) should be expressly non-exhaustive.
The protocol should provide guidance on nexus and revenue-sourcing rules under Articles 5 and 6, particularly for remote/data-driven monetization with no direct in-country payment.
The protocol should broaden “physical presence” beyond employees/agents and provide guidance on profit-allocation methods, including simplified profit allocation approaches under Article 9.
Existing treaties: Where inconsistent with an existing treaty, the Protocol should ideally automatically override the relevant provisions. However, in case treaty-by-treaty renegotiation is preferred, then the Protocol should trigger mandatory renegotiation within a defined timeframe aligned with Article 21 of the Framework Convention.
Implementation: In case the option of treaty-by-treaty renegotiation is chosen, then implementation can be done by a UN Fast-Track Instrument to streamline bilateral treaty alignment.
South Centre Inputs on Workstream I – Co-Lead’s Zero Draft of UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation
26 August 2026
Fair allocation of taxing rights should include nexus factors based on OR rather than AND, should specify methods of allocation and be de-linked from the objective of avoiding double taxation.
Conference of State Parties (COSP) should be the supreme body for administering the Framework Convention (FC) and the Protocols and any other instruments it produces, be able to undertake any actions required to achieve the objectives of the FC, and should be able to make decisions by simple majority vote.
Amendments to the FC and adoption of the FC’s Protocols should also be by simple majority.
All Parties to the FC and its Protocols should make regular and mandatory contributions. This is essential for the success of the UNFCITC. Sustained non-payment should result in denial of voting rights, as is currently the practice in the UN General Assembly under Article 19 of the UN Charter.
The commitment to align existing tax treaties, domestic law and other instruments with the FC and its Protocols should not be request-triggered, and the COSP should determine a timeline by when it will be done.
The COSP shall take measures to ensure that no Party to the FC is prevented from implementing the Convention, its Protocols and any other instruments adopted by the COSP.
The South Centre: 30 Years Advancing towards a Fair and Responsible International Investment Regime
By Daniel Uribe
This paper examines the South Centre’s 30-year effort to reform the international investment law (IIL) regime, advocating for a shift from a self-contained system to one integrated with human rights, environmental protection, and sustainable development. It analyses how the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanism has led to “regulatory chill” and legal fragmentation, disproportionately impacting developing nations. The South Centre promotes aligning investment with national development strategies through technical assistance, treaty renegotiation, and policy frameworks that emphasise investor obligations and State sovereignty. Ultimately, the paper calls for a paradigm shift in global governance to address emerging challenges such as climate change and the digital divide, thereby ensuring a more equitable and responsible investment landscape.
TOOLKIT: Leveraging the Universal Periodic Review to Advance the Rights of Women and Girls to the Highest Attainable Standards of Health
By Daniel Uribe Terán
This Toolkit serves as an operational guide for State officials, policymakers, civil society organisations (CSOs), national human rights institutions (NHRIs), and healthcare professionals on how to leverage the United Nations Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR) mechanism. The primary focus is advancing the rights of women and girls to the highest attainable standards of physical and mental health, with a specific focus on Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (SRHR).
The toolkit outlines the international normative frameworks, such as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), that establish state obligations to respect, protect, and fulfil these rights, as set out in the availability, accessibility, acceptability, and quality (AAAQ) framework. It details evidence-gathering strategies using a Human Rights-Based Approach to Data (HRBAD), guidelines for drafting impactful stakeholder or “shadow” reports, and the integration of specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) recommendations. Furthermore, it emphasises national implementation mechanisms, showcasing digital tracking innovations like Paraguay’s System for Monitoring Recommendations (SIMORE) and the Pacific region’s Integrated Management and Planning of Actions Open Source Software (IMPACT OSS). Real-world state reporting dynamics are illustrated through 4th-cycle UPR report excerpts from Mexico, South Africa, and Costa Rica.
The South Centre’s Contributions to the Reform of the International Tax System
By Abdul Muheet Chowdhary
The South Centre has, over the last 30 years, contributed to major reforms to the international tax system to make it fairer and more equitable for developing countries. Some of the key impacts relate to the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation and updates to the UN Model Tax Convention to strengthen developing countries’ taxing rights on automated digital services, shipping and air transport, services more broadly, extractive industries, insurance premiums, computer software, offshore indirect transfers of capital gains, the subject to tax rule and wealth taxes. The South Centre also produced pioneering revenue estimates for its Member States on the UN and OECD solutions for taxing the digital economy.
Transparency Without Results: UN Climate Reports Fail to Show Effective Transfer of
Technology to Developing Countries
By Ningxiner Li, intern of the Health, Intellectual Property and Biodiversity Programme (HIPB) at the South Centre
This report synthesizes the findings of research on the reporting and compliance mechanisms governing transfer of technology obligations of developed country Parties under the United Nations climate change regime. The legal basis for transfer of technology has evolved from foundational principles in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to an enhanced transparency framework (ETF) as part of the Paris Agreement, with defined modalities, procedures and guidelines for the transparency framework for action and support (MPGs). The ETF requires that developed countries submit Biennial Transparency Reports (BTRs) detailing their transfer of technology provided to developing countries. Our review of developed countries’ first BTR submissions reveals significant shortcomings that hinder proper evaluation of compliance with the transfer of technology obligations. The current system allows reporting that meets procedural requirements but fails to deliver clear, comparable, and outcome-oriented data essential for enforcing the legal obligations on transfer of technology and ensuring it serves as a genuine catalyst for global climate actions. This report argues that the ETF, as currently operationalized, prioritizes procedural transparency over substantive effectiveness. The design of the reporting requirements is characterized by discretionary language, fragmented methodologies, and weak linkages between financial and technological support. These features undermine the ability of Parties, review bodies, and the global stocktake to assess whether technology is being delivered in a manner that meaningfully supports developing countries’ climate action. Recommendations are advanced to strengthen reporting requirements, enhance traceability and comparability, and reorient the transparency framework toward measurable outcomes rather than process-based compliance. As the first comprehensive review of the first BTR submissions by developed countries, this report is intended to provide an evidentiary foundation for the 2028 MPGs review.
Addressing the Systemic Risks of Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) to Climate Action
Informal Note, 5 June 2026
By Daniel Uribe Terán, Lead Programme Officer, Sustainable Development and Climate Change Programme, South Centre
The current international investment agreement (IIA) framework, featuring over 2,200 treaties with Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms, acts as a structural barrier to the implementation of key aspects of the Paris Agreement. By protecting fossil fuel investments, those treaties create significant financial risks that may induce “regulatory chill,” deterring states from implementing necessary climate mitigation measures. Recent rulings from the International Court of Justice, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and the European Court of Human Rights have affirmed states’ sovereign rights to regulate for climate action, providing new legal tools to challenge the ISDS status quo. However, these judicial developments do not eliminate litigation risks or guarantee favourable outcomes. Consequently, states must pursue systemic reform, including treaty modernisation, the termination of outdated IIAs, the implementation of comprehensive climate carve-outs, and restrictions on forward-looking damages. Addressing these legal barriers at upcoming forums like the 64th sessions of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Subsidiary Bodies (SB 64) is essential to align international investment law with the existential imperative of a low-emission transition.
The sixty-fourth sessions of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice and the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SB64), Belém indicators, plastic treaty and Santa Marta outcomes
Informal Note, 5 June 2026
By Daniel Uribe Terán, Lead Programme Officer, and Touba Esfahani Nejad, Intern, of the Sustainable Development and Climate Change Programme (SDCC) at the South Centre
The Belém Adaptation Indicators agreed at COP30 to make adaptation more measurable. While the measurement of the adaptation efforts is a step forward, it is not sufficient. The indicators can be used for comparison and surveillance. However, the adaptation objective of the Paris Agreement is to enhance adaptive capacity, strengthen resilience and reduce vulnerability of persons and of vulnerable ecosystems that are critical for the maintenance of forest ecosystems and the provision of forest ecosystem services. To achieve these objectives, it is necessary to take effective action to provide finance, technology transfer, debt relief and capacity-building. In SB64, developing countries will have the opportunity to discuss what is the role of reporting while support for implementing adaptation measures are missing.
Input for the Human Rights Council Advisory Committee
Study on the Impact of Artificial Intelligence Systems on Good Governance
South Centre
May 2026
The South Centre has submitted technical input to the Human Rights Council Advisory Committee regarding AI systems and governance. The submission analyses the integration of AI through the framework of Rule of Law principles: effectiveness, accountability, and inclusiveness.
Three Decades of Global Engagement: The South Centre’s Contribution to Intellectual Property and Development
By Nirmalya Syam
South Centre 30th Anniversary Series No. 2, 30 April 2026
This paper is part of a series of publications made in commemoration of the 30th anniversary of the South Centre, an intergovernmental organization established in 1995 to advance the interests of developing countries in global governance. Tracing its origins to the 1990 South Commission, it examines the Centre’s pivotal role in shaping intellectual property (IP) policies to promote equitable development. Through rigorous research, advocacy, and technical assistance, the South Centre has supported negotiations at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and World Trade Organization (WTO), influencing milestones like the 2007 WIPO Development Agenda and extensions of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) transition periods for least developed countries.
Key contributions include promoting TRIPS flexibilities for public health, biodiversity, and technology transfer, with seminal publications on compulsory licensing, patent examination, and traditional knowledge protection. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Centre advocated for IP waivers to enhance access to vaccines and therapeutics. Impacts include empowering Global South nations to implement development-oriented IP strategies and reform patent laws. Looking ahead, the paper addresses challenges from digital transformation, artificial intelligence (AI), and data governance, calling for strengthened South-South cooperation and proactive advocacy to ensure inclusive IP frameworks. The South Centre remains essential for fostering sustainable development and reducing global inequalities.
The First Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels: Reclaiming Multilateralism for a Just Transition
Informal Note, 28 April 2026
By Daniel Uribe Terán
The First Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels, co-hosted by Colombia and the Netherlands, serves as a necessary platform for reclaiming multilateralism for a just transition. This paper analyses how the conference addresses the ‘judicialization’ of climate obligations following landmark 2025 advisory opinions from the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR). It highlights critical barriers facing developing countries, specifically the ‘regulatory chill’ caused by Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanisms and the ‘debt-fossil fuel trap’ that binds extractive economies to external risks. It also recognises that integrating the ‘People’s Summit’ outcomes into the official Conference could promote a reparative financial model and strengthen the principle of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC). Ultimately, Santa Marta should provide a blueprint for systemic reform, ensuring that global decarbonisation respects resource sovereignty and human dignity while moving toward a coordinated, legally backed effort for collective survival.
