Rio Principle 2

The proposal to look hard at the zero draft is right on.
In a quick review of the zero draft, for example, I noticed that paragraph 9, though included under a bracketed heading "Reaffirming Rio principles and past actions", could have the effect of gutting the extremely important Principle 21 of Stockholm Declaration and Principle 2 of the Rio Declaration (the latter is the same as Principle 21 except for two additional words). Principle 21 reads:
States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, the sovereign right to exploit their own resources pursuant to their own environmental policies, and the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.
Paragraph 9 arguably would have this effect because of the words "the principle of the sovereign right of states over their natural resources" at the end it. That language represents only the first part of Principle21/2 (i.e., "the sovereign right to exploit their own resources pursuant to their own environmental policies"), and cuts off the critical second part establishing States' responsibility for transboundary harm. States thus can argue that the second part of Principle 21/2 is superseded.
In this instance, the zero draft is in fact a negative draft.
We will need to push back against this particular language and be on the lookout for other problems like this.