 Thank you. Yes, so in this brief presentation today, I will briefly discuss the two main questions, actually. First of all, is it possible to imagine that wildlife trafficking and poaching can be qualified as a threat to the peace for the purpose of the application of Article 39 of UN Charter? And on the other hand, is this qualification desirable? What is the added value of this qualification for the repression of this transnational crime that is wildlife trafficking? So of course, I will focus on the transnational dimension of poaching and wildlife trafficking today. So actually, the Security Council already qualified wildlife trafficking and poaching as a threat to the peace. And it did so in two resolutions from 2014. One is resolution 234, and the other one is resolution 236. They respectively concerned the situation in the Central African Republic and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. But in this context, wildlife trafficking and poaching was qualified as a threat to international peace and security, but from a specific perspective and in a specific meaning. Because these activities were considered threats only so far as they were used by armed groups active in this region of the world as a form of financing. So in this sense, being involved in activities of poaching and wildlife trafficking was included in the listing criteria for targeted sanctions in this context. So we may consider this qualification as part of a broader shift, a broader tendency in the practice of the Security Council to increasingly consider questions of human security. Why? Because wildlife trafficking and poaching are not simply threats to environmental integrity or to biodiversity. They are threats also to human security understood in a broader sense. And it's sufficient for me to recall that last September, the United Nations General Assembly considered that trafficking in wildlife is a serious threat also to the socioeconomic and political stability of affected states and regions, but also to the rule of law. And I should add that last week, the United Nations Office for the United Nations Office on Dress and Crime observed that indeed the illegal trade in Pangolin was probably one of the causes for the transmission of COVID-19 to the man from wildlife to man. So it can also become a health hazard that issue in some cases. So it's really a multifaceted and global risk that states need to address. And with this respect, I would like also to point out that on several occasions the Security Council has indeed focused on various forms of transnational organized crime, qualifying them as a threat to international peace and security. So for our purposes and especially in relation to the question of whether the Security Council could be able and would qualify indeed wildlife trafficking as a threat to international peace and security in itself and not in relation to the activities of armed groups, for instance, or as a source of financial support for these groups, but in itself is the consideration of resolution 2240 2015, because this was one of the rare cases, if not the only case, where indeed the Security Council took into consideration a specific form of transnational crime, which is actually two transnational crimes, human trafficking and the smuggling of migrants and consider it as a threat to international peace and security in itself, not in relation to specific conflicts or the activities of non state groups. However, it's difficult to infer from this resolution some general criteria that could be applied to wildlife trafficking, because the rationale for the qualification of smuggling of migrants and human trafficking as a threat to peace here was the endangerment of lives of victims of trafficking or smuggled individuals. So it was a very specific situation and this of course is a problem that affects all transnational, the analysis of all transnational organized crime, because each of these crimes has specific characteristics that make it difficult to make general points from this point of view. So it's at the same time, if we observe the debates within the UN Security Council, we can also see that the question of wildlife trafficking has increasingly shifted into the background, not only in debates concerning the Central African Republic or the Democratic Republic of the Congo, but more generally the framing of wildlife trafficking as a threat to the peace has increasingly shifted into the background of debates within the council. And in any case we can, where we do find a discussion on this, it's always in relation, it's always concerning the framing of wildlife trafficking and transnational poaching as a source of financing for the activity of armed groups. So at the same time, the General Assembly of the United Nations is paying attention to wildlife trafficking, but in a completely different perspective, because on multiple occasions the General Assembly has invited a member state of the United Nations to qualify wildlife trafficking as a serious crime in the sense understood by the United Nations Convention on Transnational Organized Crime. So we can see that the perspective here is completely different because cooperation between states is encouraged in the framing of that specific convention. So at this point we also want to ask, having understood that this qualification of wildlife trafficking and poaching as an independent, as a threat to international peace and security in itself, is unlikely in the near future, what would be the added value actually of this qualification, of this framing, this would be a more effective implementation of the existing international legal framework, not only the Convention on Transnational Organized Crime, but also the Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species. And indeed, I believe that a stronger implementation of this legal framework would be a more effective strategy for a more effective and comprehensive strategy for the actual repression of this transnational crime. To make my point, I will just quickly refer to the analysis that some legal scholars have carried out of the South African legal system, because in South Africa the main problem, which is a country that is deeply affected by wildlife trafficking and poaching of course, much of the problems in responding to this phenomenon are precisely connected to the difficulties to establish extraterritorial jurisdiction over such offenses. So I believe that the Convention on Transnational Organized Crime would actually help, if correctly implemented, I mean if implemented so as to include wildlife trafficking within its scope of application, would actually provide states with effective tools of repression, especially just by way of example, I may refer to the fact that Article 16, paragraph 4 of the Convention allows states to use the Convention as grounds for extradition, or Article 18 which establishes a wide duty of cooperation between states in relation not only to search and seizure, but also to cooperation in relation to other aspects of concerning exercise of jurisdiction. So in conclusion, the increased militarization that may come from a qualification of wildlife trafficking as a threat to international peace, or even the adoption of targeted sanctions, is just a limited approach. It suffices to refer to the fact that the main effect that the resolutions I was referring to at the beginning of my presentation in relation, there was indeed the adoption only for the Central African Republic of targeted sanctions towards individuals and entities which among many other offenses had committed wildlife trafficking, but by no means were exclusively devoted to wildlife trafficking. So I will conclude here. Thank you.