Preparatory Committee for the

United Nations Conference on

 The Illicit Trade in Small Arms

 And Light Weapons in All Its Aspects

30^th Meeting (AM)

PREPARATORY COMMITTEE FOR JULY SMALL ARMS CONFERENCE

CONTINUES DISCUSSION OF DRAFT ACTION PROGRAMME

The Preparatory Committee for the United Nations Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects continued its third session this morning, hearing general comments on a draft programme of action for the upcoming Conference, which will take place 9 to 20 July in New York. 

Twenty speakers addressed the Committee, stressing such issues as:  the need to introduce concrete regulations for international brokers of small arms and light weapons; the institution of effective controls over the export and third party transfer of those weapons; and a consensus-based final document that reflected political commitments.

The representative of the United States told the Committee that the lack of regulation of international brokers was at the very heart of the illicit global trade in small arms and light weapons.  He proposed investigating the feasibility of developing “model brokering regulations”.  Such regulations could guide countries wishing to develop their own brokering regulations and serve as a basis for harmonizing national laws that currently had brokering legislation. The United States was, therefore, suggesting an appropriate venue to begin the actual development of model brokering regulations.

Viet Nam’s representative, on behalf of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) strongly supported the reaffirmation in the draft programme of action of the inherent right of nations to self-defence.  Global measures to address the illicit trafficking in small arms should not encroach upon those rights, nor on the right of States to import, produce and retain sufficient means for their legitimate self-defence, security needs and the protection of their territorial integrity and political independence.

Guyana’s representative said that while the draft went a long way, it did not adequately make the linkage between the arms trade and criminal activity. Arms trafficking was synonymous with drug trafficking and international terrorism.  Many countries were vulnerable to those phenomena and hoped the draft would address those issues.

India’s representative said while existing measures ensured that the problems associated with small arms and light weapons did not grow further, a

set of different measures was needed to gradually eliminate the already existing pool of illicit weapons.

Indonesia’s representative, speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said that the representative of the Department of Peacekeeping Operations had said, during his briefing yesterday, that Indonesian Armed Forces might have stashed weapons in East Timor.  No arms cache had been uncovered, he asserted.  Neither the United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor nor any other units had effectively controlled or monitored weapons, so no information was available on the flow or stockpiling of small arms.  The assertion made yesterday was, therefore, unsubstantiated and misleading. 

The representatives of Japan, Algeria, Cambodia, South Africa, Norway, Mexico, Philippines, Uruguay, Iraq, Vanuatu (on behalf of the Pacific Islands Forum Group), Lesotho, Argentina, Mozambique and the Republic of Korea, as well as the Observer for Switzerland also made general comments.

The Committee will meet again at 3 p.m. today to continue hearing general comments on the draft programme of action.

Background

The Preparatory Committee for the United Nations Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects met this morning to begin the second day of its third session and continue finalizing preparations for the Conference, which will take place 9 to 20 July in New York.  The Committee is expected to hear general comments from delegations on its draft programme of action.  [For background information on the current session of the Committee, see Press Release DC/2756 of 16 March.]

Statements

NGUYEN THANH CHAU (Viet Nam), speaking on behalf of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN), said that the revised draft of the programme of action incorporated the rich inputs and contributions made by Member States at the last session of the Preparatory Committee.  It was quite obvious that the draft was more balanced and had moved closer to the agreed scope and objectives of the Conference.  That was a good basis for negotiations for a document acceptable to all delegations.  The Association preferred that the Conference produce a single document containing both a political declaration and a programme of action.

He said ASEAN strongly supported the reaffirmation in the draft programme of action of the inherent right of nations to self-defence in accordance with the Charter.  Global measures to address the problem of the illicit trafficking in small arms should not encroach upon those fundamental rights, nor upon the right of States to import, produce and retain sufficient means for their legitimate self-defence, security needs and the protection of their territorial integrity and political independence.  He also strongly appealed to the wider international community, and particularly to arms-supplier countries, to accept that trade in small arms should be limited to governments and authorized registered licensed traders.

He said States alone could not tackle the illicit trade in small arms.  International cooperation and assistance needed to be enhanced to combat the problem.  He hoped the session would solve the outstanding issues in a satisfactory manner.  He expressed concern that the question of the chairmanship of the upcoming Conference was in jeopardy.  That matter should be settled in current negotiations, so the Chairman would have sufficient time to prepare for the Conference.  He stressed however, that in its pursuit of the issue of illicit small arms and light weapons, the international community should not be sidetracked from the issue of nuclear disarmament.

MITSURO DONOWAKI (Japan) submitting general comments on the draft programme of action, said that the preamble had the character of a political declaration and could be issued as an independent document.  However, Japan preferred to keep it as a preamble to the whole.  Its contents were satisfactory, in general, though some wording and ordering could be improved.  A phrase such as “decided to adopt and implement the following programme of action" should be added to the end of the section, to complete it and to dispense with paragraph 1 in sections II, III, and IV.

Regarding section II, he said that it was import to make clear that the actor at the national level was the State, at the regional level it was regional or subregional organizations and at the global level it was the United Nations and other relevant organizations.  Each paragraph, toward that end, should begin with words like “States should”, “Regional organizations should”, and so forth.  At the national level, additional paragraphs dealing with minimum export criteria should be included.  

He said in section III, the word “implementation” in the title should be dropped and restored to section IV, which relates to implementation assistance.  In the same way, “cooperation” should be clarified to the precise type, which in that section would describe entities working together -- rather than assistance.  Regional networks of information-sharing and cooperation of law enforcement agencies should thus be moved to that section, where activities requiring assistance should be included in section III.

Consequently, he said, the title of section III should be altered to “International Assistance (including Assistance Cooperation)”, and he referred to Japan’s suggestions in the working paper of 12 January (document A/Conf.192/PC27) for details.  In section IV, paragraphs 1 and 2 should be deleted, with appropriate changes in the beginning of sub-paragraphs (c) and (d).  Sub-paragraphs 1(a) through 1(d) appear to be the only substantial measures for the follow-up.  Other concrete measures might be added by, for example, expanding paragraph 32 of section II, or by stressing the need for developing and strengthening the regional frameworks for “international assistance”.  But the contents of that section must await agreement on desirable follow-up measures, as well as the contents of sections II and III.

ABDALLAH BAALI (Algeria) said that small arms and light weapons had become an international scourge, exacerbating terrorism and handicapping the development of many countries.  There had been much progress in the revision of the draft programme of action, reflecting many views.  It was necessary to further take into account all views expressed at the second session of the Preparatory Committee and take out all statements that would prevent international consensus and universal commitment. 

In addition, he said, the Bamako Declaration on the subject included a number of measures that could be useful in improving the programme of action.   The enforcement measures in that document were particularly useful, especially as regard States that acted as intermediaries or providers of arms to known terrorists and other armed groups.  Also important was the strengthening of Interpol and other forms of international policing. 

He was pleased to see international assistance emphasized in the current draft.  International cooperation remained the most assured means for serious action against the problem.  It required the firm commitment of States to dismantle the channels and funding of small arms traffic.  States must clearly commit to the exchange of information to strengthen international policing.  As far as civil society, it should be seen as an important provider of assistance to States that need it, either for awareness programmes or capacity-building help.  Algeria would like to see those non-governmental organizations that are registered with the Economic and Social Council and competent in the subject matter participate in the Conference.

KHUON KOMAR (Cambodia) said that while there was now peace in his country, the instrument of violence, namely illegal small arms, might not have been completely collected by competent authorities, despite all the good intentions.  As a country in transition from war to peace, his Government had taken severe measures to control the use and circulation of small arms and ammunition and eliminate their illegal procurement and sales.  All seized arms were destroyed. It was estimated that over 40 per cent of weapons scattered throughout his country had been amassed.

He said that Cambodia’s efforts to curb the problem of the illegal possession and circulation of small arms and light weapons would not be possible without assistance from donor countries and moral and material support from the international community.  The involvement of civic society was of paramount importance in remedying the problem as well.

He said small arms and light weapons were manufactured and traded in abundance.  Many societies were plagued by a growing level of criminal activities, terrorism and lawlessness due to the uncontrolled accumulation of such weapons.  Their proliferation had aggravated the violence associated with organized and transnational crime.  There was, therefore, a very obvious need for all to take very concrete measures to eliminate the illegal transfers of small arms.  That was a problem for the whole international community, not just any specific country.

DONALD J. MCCONNELL (United States) said lack of regulation of international brokers was at the very heart of the illicit global trade in small arms and light weapons.  His country, thus, supported addressing that issue, including aggressive follow-up measures, in the programme of action.  At the second Oslo Conference on brokering last year, the United States had proposed investigating the feasibility of developing “model brokering regulations”.  Now that the firearms protocol negotiations and the United Nations expert study on the feasibility of restricting manufacturing to authorized dealers had been completed, he believed it was now time to revisit that proposal.  The proposed regulations could guide countries wishing to develop their own brokering regulations and serve as a basis for harmonizing national laws that currently had brokering legislation.

To take the current draft further, the United States was suggesting an appropriate venue to begin the actual development of model brokering regulations.  Turning to the export of arms, he said effective controls were the keystone of any successful effort to mitigate the problems of small arms and light weapons, as well as to better control legal transfers.  “It is essential that we go as far as possible in this area”, he stressed.  He singled out third party transfers as a major factor in the diversion of legal arms into the illegal market.  To effectively curb such diversions, importing countries must assure proper end use of the imported arms.  Furthermore, exporting countries must provide oversight through end-use checks and demand the authority to approve any re-transfers. 

He said that while the current text in the draft programme of action only urged “notification to exporters”, the United States believed that the phrase did not go far enough.  The text should call for “adequate transfer authority”.  The United States did practice what it preached in that regard.  “It is well known that in the last five years we have discontinued transfers to five countries either because of abnormalities in their requested import of small arms and light weapons, or due to violations of re-export authority”, he said. “We also have an aggressive programme which seeks to verify that our end use and re-transfer rules are being obeyed”.

DUMISANI SHADRACK KUMALO (South Africa) associated himself with the statement made by Namibia on behalf of the South African Development Community (SADC).  In his region, the proliferation of small arms and light weapons were a continuing threat to post-conflict peace-building.  That was why there was much regional concern, as expressed in the various recent declarations, which had provided useful material for the draft programme of action.

He was pleased that the draft programme of action reflected the common views of African States.  States should create regional, indigenous approaches to properly address the problem.  In general, the draft programme of action must formulate comprehensive, but achievable solutions.  Due to the complexity of problems associated with the issue, the Conference would not address it conclusively.  It should, however, at the minimum, provide an agreed-upon framework for approaching it. 

There were, in addition, many other subjects related to the small arms and light weapons problem, such as disarmament, post-conflict peace-building, and  other socio-economic considerations.  The revised programme of action was a worthy basis to begin to address the problem, including as it did, methods of assistance and measures to trace the lines of supply, restrict the trade and register manufacturers and brokers.  Non-governmental organizations and civil society should be included in the effort.

LEIF ARNE ULLAND (Norway) said, in regard to the management of stockpiles and the destruction of surplus stocks, he wished to add to the draft programme of action indicators of surplus, as expressed in the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) document.  Reference was made in that document to norms, principles and measures through which participating States would undertake reductions where applicable and promote best practices in managing national inventories and securing small arms stockpiles.

With respect to establishing international standards for marking and tracing, he stressed that it was important that the Conference come up with clear and concrete recommendations on follow-up work and measures needed to identify and trace lines of supply.  In particular, it would be important that the Conference set standards for marking that permitted States to identify each small arm uniquely, so as to facilitate effective tracing and record keeping.

He said that because many illicit transfers originated as legal sales, it was within the mandate of the Conference to address how to control legal transfers of small arms and light weapons.  Information exchange and transparency on small arms flows would be of great help in uncovering and combatting their illicit spread.  It was also necessary to agree on common principles and criteria for arms exports and transfers, including respect for human rights and international law.

Expressing regret at the lack agreement on the participation of non-governmental organizations during the January Preparatory Committee, he stressed that they were needed as partners in building awareness and furthering the implementation of the programme of action.  It was time to conclude the consideration of that issue and the Committee should now take a decision that ensured the full and active participation of non-governmental organizations and civil society.

LUIS ALFONSO DE ALBA (Mexico) said that the revised programme of action was an extraordinarily good basis for the work of the upcoming Conference.  The national, regional and global distinctions of efforts to combat the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons was particularly useful.  There was a need to distinguish necessary actions at each level.  Though national and regional commitments were important, without appropriate action on the international level, it would be difficult to establish the necessary balance.

Ongoing initiatives being undertaken at various levels needed to be taken into account and made complementary to the activities of the Conference, he said.  Also, instruments beyond crime prevention and illicit trade had to be dealt with, such as the legal trade in relevant weapons.  Those issues were reflected in the document, and he supported it, even if there was always room for improvement.  He supported, in addition, the hearing of proposals from organizations representing civil society.  The input of every sector was necessary to create an effective response to the problem.  He further emphasized the need to find compromise formulas and realistic solutions.  The Conference would be effective to the extent that an inclusive movement was created.

ENRIQUE MANALO (Philippines), associating himself with the views of ASEAN, noted that the draft programme of action contained reformulations and deletions of language that should have been maintained.  While understanding the importance of compromise in achieving the widest possible consensus, it was hoped that those compromises would be equally reciprocated in order to accomplish the Preparatory Committee's work to the satisfaction of all.

He emphasized the importance of promoting regional cooperation, building national capacities and strengthening and building on the measures contained in the draft programme of action, including through the negotiation of binding legal instruments.

Urging that non-governmental organizations be allowed to participate meaningfully in the preparatory process, he reiterated his country's support for the comprehensive approach that was clearly reflected in the draft, rather than adopting an exclusionary approach.  It was not necessary to discuss matters relating to scope, as a debate on that issue might take too much time.

SAMUEL INSANALLY (Guyana) said the Preparatory Committee now needed to focus its attention on those parts of the draft programme of action that needed to be settled.  While the draft went a long way, it did not adequately make the link between the arms trade and criminal activity.  Arms trafficking was synonymous with drug trafficking and international terrorism.  Many countries, including his, were vulnerable to those phenomena.  He hoped the draft would address those issues.

He said many States did not have the capacity to deal with the threats posed by the illicit trafficking in small arms.  That was another issue for the draft programme of action to address.  The final text also needed to define more clearly the role that could be played by the United Nations and its agencies in matters related to the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons.  It also needed to illustrate who would assist small States and provide them with security when they alone could not afford to fight high-tech activities.

Turning to non-governmental organization participation at the Conference, he said he supported the inclusion of a reasonable number of relevant organizations.  Addressing the chairmanship of the Conference, he said his regional group –- Latin America and Caribbean States –- and the Non-Aligned Movement had endorsed Camilo Reyes of Colombia for the position.  While it was preferable that a separate document, by way of political declaration, comes out of the upcoming Conference, the draft in its present form seemed coherent and holistic.  He did not wish to rob it of its integrity.  In that light, the draft could be strengthened to reflect the political commitments needed to address the illicit traffic in small arms.

ALBERTO GUANI (Uruguay) said that though he supported the text generally, it could be improved.  It was clear that the declaration should remain as a preamble and not a separate document.  Links between the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons and other illicit trades, such as traffic in drugs and children, as well as money laundering, should be emphasized.

Also essential, he said, was a focus on uniform procedures and the rapid identification of the weapons.  The role of peacekeeping operations should also be emphasized.  He noted that regional efforts had already had made some headway in the fight against the problem in Latin America.  He mentioned other initiatives and understandings that had made headway in the fight against the problem.  Finally, he said that the issue of the Conference chairman had not yet been resolved.  He supported Camillo Reyes of Colombia.

MOHAMMAD HUSSEIN MOHAMMAD (Iraq) said his country supported the statement made by the League of Arab States and the Arab perspective on the issue of small arms and light weapons.  He hoped the framework for the work of the July Conference was clear.  In addition, the framework of the final document should refer only to the illicit trade and trafficking in small arms and light weapons and should not impede the legitimate right of States to self-defence.

He said controversial aspects should therefore not be included in the draft programme of action, specifically issues that had nothing to do with illegal arms trading.  Iraq supported the position of the Arab group, particularly its views on the need to mention in the programme of action the priority of disarmament and the very clear right of nations to self-determination.

RAIMUND KUNZ (Switzerland) reiterated the importance he attached to the fullest participation of civil society in the work at hand.  As for the revised programme of action, there were some sections that were not as ambitious as he would like.  He understood, though, that the document struck a balance between views expressed at the last session of the Preparatory Committee.

He particularly wished to express satisfaction at seeing the issue of tracing, marking, and record-keeping prominent in the document.  That aspect was the focus of a recent initiative of France and Switzerland.  Both countries would distribute summaries of their efforts in that regard.  He approved of the division of subject matter between the various sections of the draft programme of action, as well as the preamble.  Switzerland would contribute more comments on the various sections as they came up.

ALFRED CARLOT (Vanuatu), speaking on behalf of the Pacific Islands Forum Group (Australia, Fiji, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga and Vanuatu), called for greater emphasis on regional measures in the draft programme of action.  It was at the regional and subregional levels that many measures stood the greatest chance of actually being implemented and making the greatest impact as quickly as possible.

He said that inclusion of specific regional measures relating to stockpile management and safe storage, and collection and destruction of illicit and surplus small arms and light weapons would be useful in section II of the draft.  Technical cooperation and assistance, especially at the regional level, was critically important.

Welcoming efforts to develop a realistic follow-up plan, he expressed support for the convening of a review conference in 2006 and meetings of States every two years, as well as other follow-up measures outlined in the final section of the draft programme of action.  Reiterating the Forum Group's commitment to work for a constructive outcome of the Conference, he said the Preparatory Committee's plenary meetings should remain open to attendance by non-governmental organizations.

PERCY MANGOAELA (Lesotho) fully associated his country with the statement made by the Permanent Representative of the Republic of Namibia on behalf of the SADC.  Though the problem continues to cause much human suffering, international frameworks to combat the problem of small arms and light weapons were starting to be created.  He mentioned the work in Vienna on the firearms Protocol, the study on brokering-related activities, as well as high-level political pronouncements, such as the SADC Declaration.  The momentum created by those developments should be built upon. 

Praising the revised version of the draft programme of action, he said that it took into account the language of regional efforts, as well as striking a fair balance between a divergence of views.  In welcoming many of the specific improvements of the revised version, he noted that the obvious interrelationship that existed between illicit trafficking and the licit trade was adequately captured without necessarily taking away from the scope of the Conference.  That balance must, he said, be maintained.  The implementation of the measures envisaged in section II would largely depend on the effective cooperation of States.  He was confident that in the near future measures for cooperation would be strengthened through an international legal instrument.  Those measures should not be deleted from section IV.

LUIS E. CAPPAGLI (Argentina) said the revised draft programme of action provided a good basis for current deliberations.  With a few adjustments it would ensure the success of July’s Conference.  The document outlined initiatives that needed to be taken to coordinate the global process to combat the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons.  The plan of action to be adopted by the upcoming Conference would also complement national, subregional and regional efforts that were already underway.  Those efforts would not be successful unless they were complemented by global action.

He said Argentina wished to emphasize the importance of taking into account the views expressed by the group of inter-governmental experts on restricting the trade of weapons to manufacturers and intermediaries authorized by States.  His country believed that the point of departure in efforts to combat the illicit trade must be the standardization of norms and criteria, and enhanced cooperation between agencies.  The establishment of specific criminal and administrative liability and the creation of agencies to monitor and control the manufacture and distribution of small arms and light weapons constituted the minimum that could be done to address the problem at hand.

MARIA MANUELA LUCAS (Mozambique) said that the revised programme of action was precise, well-balanced and a good basis for further work.  She was proud to see that it drew extensively from the Bamako Declaration, which she fully supported.  Such regional initiatives and declarations in Africa showed the region’s concern over the scourge under discussion, and pointed the way to effective action.  Regional and subregional organizations should continue to act.  She spoke about the extensive harm caused by the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons and said that the Conference could not be an end in itself, but the beginning of concerted international action against the problem.  Compromise and consensus were, therefore, most important.

SUN JOUN-YUNG (Republic of Korea), welcoming the consensus adoption of the firearms Protocol in Vienna two weeks ago, said that although it had not enjoyed the support of all Member States participating in the negotiation, it represented a hard-earned balance between divergent views.  The Preparatory Committee should build on the outcome of that negotiation.

Turning to section II of the draft programme of action, he said that States should ensure strict adherence to the laws and regulations governing the production, export, import and stockpiling of small arms and light weapons.  Effective State control was key to deterring an excessive accumulation of weapons.  Export criteria should be further elaborated, as it would prevent the misuse of small arms and light weapons.

He said that marking should be unique, simple, and user-friendly, so that all authorities concerned could easily identify and trace each weapon.  While it might currently be unfeasible to adopt a universal marking system, every country should make efforts to harmonize its marking system with the universally prevailing system.

Regionally, it was desirable to establish an information-sharing network among law enforcement and customs control agencies to ensure the effective implementation of the programme of action, he said.  Globally, even if the programme of action proposed to establish an international arrangement or legally binding instrument, a model instrument would be more desirable.  Such an instrument would define a common denominator, while allowing individual countries to implement those measures domestically.

He said his country recognized that there were still divergent views regarding the participation of non-governmental organizations.  In light of their current and potential role in combatting the proliferation of small arms and light weapons, the Republic of Korea supported their wide participation in the Conference and in its preparatory process.

RAKESH SOOD (India) said strong laws and political commitment would be required to deal firmly with the phenomena of illicit manufacturing and assembling of small arms.  The problem-solving approach required spelling out “legality”, so that “we make clear, unambiguously, what constitutes illicit activity, thus defining the scope”, he said.  Most countries already had related laws, but private ownership of highly lethal weapons was a problem in certain societies.  While it was for those societies to judge how they wanted to restrict such ownership, it was the international community’s legitimate concern to ensure that those domestic markets did not become a source for illicit international trade.

He said globilization had added to the complexity of the problem of small arms proliferation.  Today, supply routes and financial transactions spanned continents with ease, encouraged by transnational networks.  “We should ensure that such transfers, where licensed, are made only to State entities, thus preventing diversion”, he urged.  The use of licenses with end-user assurances and re-export restrictions was essential.  Traceability, which included marking and record keeping, were the nuts and bolts of global cooperation.

He said that the international community needed to accept the norm of marking all weapons, in accordance with comprehensive definitions, maintaining full records and exchanging such information by establishing simple and effective procedures.  The limited institutional cooperation in some regions also needed to be globalized.  While existing measures ensured that the problems associated with small arms and light weapons did not grow further, a set of different measures was needed to gradually eliminate the already existing pool of illicit weapons.  Related projects had already been undertaken successfully in some regions, demonstrating the value of regional and global cooperation.

HAZAIRIN POHAN (Indonesia) exercising the right of reply, said that the representative of the Department of Peacekeeping Operations had said, during his briefing yesterday, that Indonesian Armed Forces may have secretly stashed some of the weapons in East Timor.  It should be known, he said, that Indonesia was supporting the work of the United Nations Transitional Administration in Timor (UNTAET) in assisting East Timor gain independence.  In addition, no arms cache had been uncovered.  Furthermore, neither UNTAET nor any other units had been effective in controlling or monitoring weapons, and so no information was available on the flow or stockpiling of small arms.  Therefore, the Department’s representative made an unsubstantiated and misleading assertion.  He categorically rejected it.

* *** *