1. The Standing Committee (SC) on Stockpile Destruction, originally established as the Standing Committee of Experts on Stockpile Destruction in accordance with the decisions and recommendations of the 3-7 May 1999 First Meeting of the States Parties (FMSP), met in Geneva on 7 December 2000 and 10 May 2001.

2. At the Second Meeting of the States Parties (SMSP), it was agreed, in accordance with paragraph 28 of the final report of the SMSP, that Malaysia and Slovakia would serve as Co-Chairs of the SC, with Australia and Croatia serving as Co-Rapporteurs.

3. Representatives of more than 80 States Parties, United Nations bodies, the ICRC, ICBL and numerous other relevant organizations were registered as participants in either or both of the two meetings.

4. The meetings of the SC received administrative support from the GICHD.

5. The SC conducted its work in the following thematic areas: stockpile destruction as an integral part of mine action; the need for adequate and equitable allocation of resources and of matching donors with needs; and the lessons learned from case studies, both national and regional; the necessity for the SC to continue focusing on the way ahead and to assist countries in meeting the four-year deadline.

6. The SC reiterated that stockpile destruction, as the "fifth pillar" of mine action, was an integral part of the Convention’s implementation and that compliance with Article 4 obligations should receive high political priority.

7. The SC considered a number of practical issues with a view to highlighting the importance of the core objective of the SC, namely to facilitate a swift and dramatic reduction in the number of stockpiled anti-personnel mines globally, including through the following:

- ensuring political priority for stockpile destruction;

- updating and assessing overall progress with regard to stockpile destruction; (including providing progress report on global stockpiles and their destruction);

• emphasizing the obligations and rights of countries under Article 4 of the Convention;
• discussing the merits and constraints of various methods and technologies for destruction as experienced by individual countries;
• emphasizing the role of both the military and private sectors in stockpile destruction, depending on individual countries needs;
• taking into account logistical, technical, financial and environmental considerations in planning the stockpile destruction programmes;
• considering all possible alternatives to the current methods of stockpile destruction;
• stressing the key role of proper planning and implementation of the process leading up to the actual destruction of stockpiles;
• recognizing the need for continuous financial and technical assistance-bilateral, multilateral and regional approaches to stockpile destruction;

- including the information on stockpile destruction in the Article 7 reports;

- focusing on the issue of foreign stockpiles;

- engaging the media and the public at large in the process of stockpile destruction;

- considering mechanisms for engaging non-States parties in reducing their stockpiles.

III. Actions taken related to the development of specific tools and

instruments to assist in implementing the Convention

 

8. A website related to stockpile destruction was established by the United Nations Mine Action Service (UNMAS) and Canada in September 2000 and States were encouraged to make contributions. Information contained in the website includes proposed United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) guidelines on stockpile destruction, as well as a list of companies, experts and related technologies on stockpile destruction. It is believed that a cumulative list of companies, experts and related technologies could provide a necessary link between "donor" and "recipient" countries when designing future cooperative structures.

9. Experts’ seminars on stockpile destruction proved to be a useful tool for sharing expertise and experience in coping with the problems and challenges of stockpile destruction.

10. Regional initiatives contributed to stockpile destruction efforts. For example, the Managua Challenge (see below) contributed greatly to the speed at which stockpile destruction has been achieved in the Americas. This concrete example of a regional approach to stockpile destruction could also be applied in other regions, such as Africa and Asia.

11. The important role that ICBL’s Landmine Monitor plays in reporting on the global process of stockpile destruction and contributing to greater transparency on this issue was highly appreciated.

IV. Action taken or in process to assist in the

implementation of the Convention

 

12. Exploring avenues for finding additional resources for stockpile destruction projects continued to be one of the areas of concern addressed during the intersessional meetings. Various bilateral, multilateral and regional approaches were considered as means for seeking funding for stockpile destruction projects. The initiative launched by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (NATO/EAPC) in Albania was cited as one of the most effective examples of assistance in stockpile destruction.

13. Many delegations offered to share their experiences with stockpile destruction, in particular with regard to the merits and constraints of various methods of destruction. Various financial, technical, social and environmental considerations were also discussed, and an emphasis was placed on the need for careful planning and implementation of the process leading up to the actual destruction of stockpiles. The need to consider engaging the media and the public at large in the process of stockpile destruction was also emphasized.

14. The roles of UNMAS and UNDP in facilitating stockpile destruction projects were also discussed. UNDP is present in 137 countries worldwide, and therefore in countries where UNMAS is not present, the UNDP acts as that country’s first and often only link with outside donors. Although United Nations agencies are traditionally involved in facilitating humanitarian demining activities, the possibility of expanding their activities to facilitate stockpile destruction should not be excluded.

15. States Parties that have decided to retain zero stocks of anti-personnel mines explained the rationale for such a move. Many other countries which had originally retained high number of stockpiled APLs in accordance with the provisions of Article 3 of the Convention, made encouraging and positive steps towards reducing the overall number of stockpiled APLs.

16. A Regional Seminar on Stockpile Destruction was held in Buenos Aires, Argentina, on 6-7 November 2000, at which the Managua Challenge was launched. The aim of the Managua Challenge is to assist OAS member States to develop and execute national stockpile destruction plans, to identify technical resources and funding necessary for stockpile destruction, to facilitate international certification, and to assist with any other requirements within the capabilities and mandate of the OAS. In concrete terms, the Managua Challenge set out three goals: (a) it urged the signatories of the Ottawa Convention in the Americas to join the 27 States Parties from the region by ratifying the Convention, and thereby to maintain political momentum in the region to implement the Convention; (b) it encouraged States Parties to complete their Article 7, with the aim of promoting greater transparency; and (c) it aimed to complete the destruction of all stockpiles in American States by the Third Meeting of States Parties in Managua in September 2001.

17. A Seminar on the Destruction of PFM1 and PFM1S mines was held in Budapest, Hungary, on 1-2 February 2001. The primary aim of the seminar was to stimulate technical dialogue on the PFM mine problem among affected countries, technical experts and donors. The conclusions of the seminar highlighted the need for more information on the chemical components of the PFM mine, and therefore the need for a technical study of the PFM mine so as to gain reliable technical data for working out the best possible technical solution. The question of funding for this project was also discussed, and it was stressed that donor support would need to be channeled through an appropriate mechanism.

18. A Seminar on the Universalization and Implementation of the Ottawa Convention in Africa was held in Bamako, Mali, on 15-16 February 2001. Although the objective of this meeting was to help facilitate universalization, ratification and full implementation of the Convention in Africa, a stockpile destruction workshop was held in the framework of the meeting. As the stockpile destruction workshop affirmed that little is known of the scale of the problem in many African countries, it also concluded that there is a need to develop a database on the scope of the APL problem in all African countries. The database would include the number of stockpiled APLs. It was noted that the lack of financial aid is the primary reason for delays in implementing stockpile destruction programmes. It was therefore suggested that a fund be set up for deserving cases. Canada has already pledged to contribute to such a fund, while Canada and the GICHD have pledged to assist in planning stockpile destruction programmes with technical/expert advice. It was also suggested that the UNDP examine the possibility of managing voluntary contributions in this regard, and that interested countries follow up on France’s offer to send military personnel to assist with stockpile destruction programmes.

19. An Antipersonnel Mines Stockpile Destruction Management Training Course was held in Fribourg, Switzerland, on 11-15 June 2001. The course offered training for experts who were involved in their respective national stockpile destruction programmes. It was hoped that at the end of the Training Course, participants would be in a position to better assess their national situations and therefore also APL stockpile destruction options; to make technical evaluations of existing stocks; to elaborate standard procedures; to use existing national resources; to identify areas of international cooperation; and to use available international experience.

20. A Regional Asia-Pacific Stockpile Destruction Meeting was held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, on 8-9 August 2001. The meeting was attended by representatives from the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) member-countries. The meeting provided a forum for government officials, experts as well as non-governmental organizations to engage in technical discussions on methods for the destruction of APLs and other munitions, and also included discussions on safe, efficient and environmentally friendly methods of storage, transport, planning and destruction operations using international standards.

21. The Committee agreed that, at the TMSP, the urgency and importance of stockpile destruction should be reiterated.

22. It was recommended that information regarding the existence, number and type of stockpiled APLs throughout the world should be made more readily available. This was considered to be especially important in regions of the world where there is a general lack of information on this issue.

23. It was recommended that sufficient resources need to be identified to assist States with stockpile destruction operations, along with the appropriate mechanisms to effectively deliver this assistance. Coordination must be carried out among donors to identify priorities for stockpile destruction funding.

24. It was recommended that the process of stockpile destruction be concluded in an environmentally sound manner, especially with regard to certain types of APLs the detonation of which can have toxic side effects, such as with the PFM1 type of APL. Due attention should be given to environmental policies as well as risk assessments in implementing stockpile destruction programmes.

25. It was recommended that States Parties be encouraged to utilize the APL Stockpile Destruction database website established by UNMAS and Canada (http://www.stockpiles.org), and for purposes of increased transparency encourages all interested parties to contribute to the website, including by providing information on issues such as new technologies for stockpile destruction, industrial information, national policies as well as case studies.

26. It was recommended that the idea of regional initiatives should be explored further so as to help accelerate the stockpile destruction process worldwide.

Report of the Standing Committee on the

General Status and Operation of the Convention

to the Third Meeting of States Parties

 

I. Introduction

 

1. The Standing Committee on General Status and Operation of the Convention (SC-GSO), established in accordance with the decisions and recommendations of the 3-7 May 1999 First Meeting of States Parties (FMSP) and the 11-15 September 2000 Second Meeting of States Parties (SMSP), met in Geneva on 7 December 2000 and 11 May 2001.

2. At the SMSP it was agreed, in accordance with paragraph 28 of the final report, that Belgium and Zimbabwe would serve as Co-Chairs of the SC-GSO, with Norway and Thailand serving as Co-Rapporteurs.

3. In keeping with the Convention's tradition, the Standing Committee meetings proceeded in the spirit of partnership, inclusivity, transparency and practical cooperation. The level of participation, in particular from mine-affected countries, was significant with approximately 350 persons from over 80 countries in attendance at the intersessional meetings, in addition to numerous international and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), including the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

4. The Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining (GICHD) provided valuable and essential administrative and organizational support to the Standing Committees, which was greatly appreciated by the Co-Chairs and the meeting participants.

5. The SC-GSO noted with satisfaction that the Intersessional Work Programme, in its first two years of operation, has become the meeting place it was intended to be, bringing together mine-affected and donor countries, international and regional organizations, and NGOs to mark, measure and stimulate progress in the full implementation of the Convention. The Standing Committee noted that the Intersessional Work Programme is a valuable contribution to the successful implementation of the Convention.

5. The First Meeting of States Parties created the intersessional work programme in order to "consolidate and concentrate global Mine Action efforts … and to highlight the role of the Convention as a comprehensive framework for Mine Action". In this respect, the SC-GSO also noted with satisfaction that the structure of the Intersessional Standing Committee meetings since the Second Meeting of States Parties has contributed to the enhanced functioning of the intersessional SC meetings.

7. The SC-GSO noted with satisfaction that the Sponsorship Programme, established prior to the SMSP, has facilitated a broader participation of mine-affected countries in all ISC meetings.

8. The SC-GSO noted that the contributions of the ICBL and the ICRC, have been of substantive value in all four of the Standing Committees.

9. The SC-GSO acknowledged that while progress has been made, further consideration should be given to possible further improvements, specifically in relation to the format and time allocated to the different Standing Committees, as well as to desired concrete outcomes and action plans.

10. The SC-GSO addressed the need, as expressed by numerous States Parties, for a strengthened support function for the Convention, in order to ensure its consolidation and continued momentum, as well as the sustainability of the intersessional work programme, considered crucial to the effective implementation of the Convention. The SC-GSO recognized that the GICHD would be the appropriate entity through which to provide the enhanced support as this could build on the existing efforts that the GICHD has provided so far.

11. The SC-GSO devoted attention to the preparation of the Third Meeting of States Parties (TMSP), including the adoption of the draft budget for the TMSP. In this context, the Committee also reiterated the request to UNDDA to provide the financial reports from the annual Meetings of States Parties in a timely manner. The Committee agreed to simplify the procedures for delegations' participation in the MSP in Rule 4 of the draft Rules of Procedure. It was further agreed that the venue for the Fourth MSP will be Geneva. The SC Co-Chairs also serve as Vice-Presidents of the annual Meetings of States Parties. A proposal for the 8 new Co-Rapporteurs of the 4 SCs will be presented to the TMSP for decision.

12. The SC-GSO welcomed the valuable role of the Coordinating Committee (CC), chaired by the President of the Meeting of States Parties, which has met regularly since the SMSP. Initially a meeting of the SC Co-Chairs, the CC meetings now include the Co-Rapporteurs. The ICBL and the ICRC have been invited to the CC meetings as of June 2001, to deal with the preparation of the TMSP. The CC is a representative, geographically balanced body elected by the annual MSPs. The CC is considered key to the effective implementation of the Convention. It has been a useful mechanism for improved functioning, consistency and coordination of the intersessional work programme, for planning of the annual Meetings of States Parties and for exchanges of views.

13. The SC-GSO welcomed the work carried out by the Universalization Contact Group, established and led by Canada. This informal group held several meetings on the margins of the intersessional weeks and the SMSP in Geneva. The Universalization Contact Group has been open-ended, with 15 States Parties, ICBL, ICRC and others taking part in the meetings. Interested States Parties or relevant organizations willing to actively participate and promote universalization of the Convention are welcome to join. The Committee expressed appreciation for the many actions taken by the ICBL and ICRC to promote the Convention.

14. The Committee noted with appreciation the various regional initiatives taken to reach potential new States Parties, such as the Pan-African seminar in Bamako, Mali, in February 2001 on the universalization and the implementation of the Convention. There have also been important initiatives in the Asia and Pacific region, as well as the Americas region.

15. The SC-GSO noted a positive momentum in the progress on ratifications. 118 countries have either ratified or acceded to the Convention and the number is constantly growing. With an additional 22 countries having signed, but not yet ratified the Convention, the number of States Parties and signatories now totals 140. Global efforts to promote understanding of, compliance with and consolidation of the Convention are to be encouraged.

16. The SC-GSO devoted considerable attention to what may be permitted under Article 1 (c) in relation to the interpretation of "assist", with regard to a) the legality of joint operations with non-States Parties using anti-personnel mines and b) the stockpiling and transit of foreign anti-personnel mines.

17. Some States Parties have made information available about their national practices in these matters and supported continued enhanced dialogue. The ICBL has also asked for more information exchange on matters related to Article 1 (c).

18. The SC-GSO addressed the issue of anti-vehicle mines with sensitive fuses or sensitive anti-handling devices with a view to taking all possible steps to minimize the risk to civilian populations of certain anti-vehicle mines. The SC-GSO noted the "Report on the ICRC Technical Expert Meeting on Anti-vehicle Mines with Sensitive Fuses or with Sensitive Handling Devices", held on 13-14 March 2001 in Geneva, particularly the identification by participants at the Expert Meeting of possible best practices regarding the design and use of certain fusing mechanisms on anti-vehicle mines. Several delegations expressed their support during the May Standing Committee meeting for the establishment of such "best practices". It was understood that particular attention should be given to anti-vehicle mines which can be detonated by a person, including those equipped with low-pressure fuses, tripwires, breakwires and tilt rods and that further research regarding Article 2 point 3 is needed. ICBL reminded the SC-GSO that States Parties have acknowledged that directional fragmentation (claymore type) mines may be used only in command detonated mode and not with tripwires; and recommended that States Parties report on claymore-type mines held in stocks and steps taken to ensure use by command detonation only.

19. It was noted that 34 States Parties have reported in their Article 7 reports that they retained anti-personnel mines for training and development purposes. It was reiterated that the understanding of the Oslo negotiators was that the numbers of retained anti-personnel mines should be the "minimum number absolutely necessary and should be calculated in hundreds or thousands, and not in tens of thousands". The Committee took note of the ICBL suggestion that States Parties include information on the intended purpose and actual use of anti-personnel mines retained for training or development purposes in their national reports submitted under Article 7.

20. The SC-GSO noted that there was an increase in the number of States Parties that have submitted their reports to the UNSG on time. Optional Form J, which can be used, on a voluntary basis, to report on Victim Assistance and other matters, was used by some States Parties.

21. The SC-GSO acknowledged the difficulties faced by some States Parties in reporting and took note of the efforts to assist them, including through the Article 7 Contact Group established by Belgium. The draft Article 7 Reporting Guide distributed at the May Standing Committee meeting, developed by VERTIC in cooperation with Belgium and the ICBL, can be a useful tool to States Parties in preparing their reports.

22. The SC-GSO noted the concerns expressed by ICBL and its urging of States Parties to include information in their Article 7 reports on Claymore mines, prohibited anti-vehicle mines with sensitive fuses or sensitive anti-handling devices, intended purpose and actual use of mines retained under Article 3, as well as on foreign stockpiles under their jurisdiction or control.

23. The SC-GSO took note of ICBL's concerns on compliance matters, the respect for the international norm being established by the Convention and the question of dealing with the use of mines by non-States Parties. The SC-GSO noted the possibility of measures short of invoking Article 8, such as consultations or seeking clarification on compliance issues, if there are possible non-compliances.

24. The SC-GSO recognized the work by Canada on the operationalization of Article 8. Canada was encouraged to pursue its active role and involvement. The SC-GSO agreed with the conclusion in the working paper produced by Canada that further dialogue and discussions on the matter should continue.

25. The SC-GSO welcomed the increase in the number of States Parties that have adopted implementation measures at the national level, in conformity with Article 9. The SC-GSO also welcomed the "Information Kit on the Development of National Legislation to Implement the Convention on the Prohibition of Anti-Personnel Mines" intended to assist interested States Parties, which was developed by the ICRC, in cooperation with Belgium and the ICBL.

26. The SC-GSO recognized the following as useful tools:

· The "Report on the ICRC Technical Expert Meeting on Anti-vehicle Mines with Sensitive Fuses or with Sensitive Handling Devices";

· The Article 7 Reporting Guide developed by VERTIC, in cooperation with Belgium and the ICBL;

· The "Information Kit on the Development of National Legislation to Implement the Convention on the Prohibition of Anti-Personnel Mines" developed by ICRC, in cooperation with Belgium and the ICBL.

27. Furthermore, the Landmine Monitor 2000 - published by the ICBL - provides regularly updated LM factsheets on Stockpile Destruction, Article 7 reporting and other relevant matters, such as Joint Operations, which are available on the ICBL website (cfr 54).

28. The Intersessional Work Programme and its Standing Committee meetings play a crucial role in the successful implementation of the Convention.

29. The Universalization Contact Group, chaired by Canada, continues to be effective in promoting universalization of the Convention. The Article 7 Contact Group, chaired by Belgium is a useful means of promoting Article 7 reporting by States Parties.

30. The ongoing efforts of the ICBL and the ICRC remain important to the successful implementation of the Convention.

31. It is recommended that the TMSP recognize the value and importance of the Coordinating Committee in the effective functioning and implementation of the Convention. It is recommended that the Coordinating Committee be tasked to consider further improvements in the format, timing and concrete outcomes of the Intersessional SC meetings.

32. It is recommended that the TMSP agree to mandate the GICHD to increase its support to the Convention. For this purpose an Implementation Support Unit (ISU) should be established within the GICHD. States Parties in a position to do so are encouraged to provide adequate financial resources to the ISU.

33. It is recommended that the TMSP express appreciation for the establishment of the Sponsorship Programme. Donor countries are encouraged to continue their financial contributions to the Programme and additional donor countries would be welcomed.

34. It is recommended that the TMSP express appreciation for and welcome the substantive participation of the ICBL and the ICRC in the intersessional meetings.

35. It is recommended that the first of the next two intersessional weeks take place on 28 January to 1 February 2002 and that the second take place on 27 to 31 May 2002.

36. It is recommended that the TMSP decide that the Fourth MSP will be held in Geneva on 16 to 20 September 2002.

37. It is recommended that the following States be nominated to serve as Co-Rapporteurs following the TMSP:

· Victim Assistance and Socio-Economic Reintegration (and Mine Awareness): Colombia and France

· Mine Clearance and Related Technologies (and Mine Awareness): Belgium and Kenya

· Stockpile destruction: Romania and Switzerland

· General Status and Operation of the Convention: Austria and Peru

38. It is recommended that the Universalization Contact Group be encouraged to continue its work and more States Parties are encouraged to contribute to efforts to universalize the Convention.

39. It is recommended that States Parties note the need for increased efforts in the regions where a number of countries have not yet acceded to the Convention.

40. It is recommended that further consultations be undertaken with a view to reaching a common understanding of the interpretation of Article 1 (c), before the first Review Conference of the Convention in 2004. States Parties are encouraged to inform the SC-GSO of their national views and practices.

41. It is recommended that the TMSP encourage States Parties to review the anti-vehicle mines in their own inventories to ensure that the risk they pose to individual civilians is minimized. States Parties are encouraged to consider and to adopt, as appropriate, relevant best practices of the type identified in the report of the ICRC-hosted Expert Meeting on anti-vehicle mines with sensitive fuses or with sensitive anti-handling devices (13-14 March 2001).

42. It is recommended that the States Parties reaffirm the understanding that anti-personnel mines retained for training and development purposes in accordance with Article 3 should be kept to the minimum number absolutely necessary and be numbered in the hundreds or thousands, and not in the tens of thousands.

43. In keeping with the legal obligation to report on anti-personnel mines retained under Article 3, it is recommended that States Parties be encouraged to include information on the intended purpose and actual use of such mines in their Article 7 reports and to inform the SC-GSO accordingly.

44. It is recommended that the TMSP urge all States Parties to fulfil their reporting obligations in accordance with the provisions of Article 7.

45. It is recommended that the TMSP note with appreciation various efforts, such as those undertaken by Vertic, the Belgian Government and the ICBL, among others, to assist States Parties in overcoming reporting difficulties. It is also recommended that the TMSP note the Article 7 Reporting Handbook produced by Vertic, in cooperation with the Belgian government and ICBL, as a useful guide in preparing national reports in accordance with the requirements of Article 7. It is recommended that the Article 7 Contact Group be encouraged to continue its work.

46. States Parties are invited to use Optional Form J, on a voluntary basis, for expanded reporting on victim assistance and other relevant matters.

47. It is recommended that the TMSP note with appreciation efforts by Canada and encourage Canada to continue the dialogue further on the matter of the operationalization of Article 8.

48. It is recommended that the TMSP note with appreciation the work of ICRC in collaboration with Belgium and the ICBL on the "Information Kit on the Development of National Legislation". States Parties are encouraged to enact national legislation and adopt other implementing measures in accordance with the requirements of Article 9, making use on a voluntary basis of the Information Kit. States Parties, which have not adopted legislative measures to implement the Convention, are urged to inform the SC-GSO meetings of the status of efforts to enact such measures and to inform the SC-GSO of other relevant measures taken.

49. Universalization Contact Group: kerry.brinkert@dfait-maeci.gc.ca

50. Article 7 Contact Group: Danielle.Haven@diplobel.fed.be

51. "Report on the ICRC Technical Expert Meeting on Anti-vehicle Mines with Sensitive Fuses or with Sensitive Handling Devices": weapons.gva@icrc.org

52. Article 7 Reporting Guide: www.vertic.org and angela@vertic.org

53. "Information Kit on the Development of National Legislation to Implement the Convention on the Prohibition of Anti-Personnel Mines": http://www.icrc.org and weapons.gva@icrc.org

54. ICBL website: http://www.icbl.org [Landmine Monitor (LM) online and LM Factsheets, Index on Landmines resources and extensive updated landmines information]

55. Reference Documents for the Standing Committee on the General Status and Operation of the Convention (December 2000 and May 2001): Co-Chair Belgium

Contact: Danielle.Haven@diplobel.fed.be

---

Page actions: > Translate page > Monitor page > Print page > Recommend this page to a friend!

E-mail: Webmaster: Webversion/Compilation © International Campaign to Ban Landmines - www.icbl.org Read our Copyright Policy and Privacy/Spam policy www.icbl.org/3msp/final/annex_iii.html Page Last Modified: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 15:37 GMT