International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL)
Printer Friendly VersionTell a friend about this page

Update 6 - International Cooperation & Assistance, Compliance, & Transparency, 21 & 22 September 2006

MAIN POINTS OF DICUSSION

Cooperation and assistance, Preventing and Suppressing Prohibited Activities, Transparency and Exchange of Information, Implementation Support

ICBL PRESENTATIONS

  • ICBL’s Head of Delegation Steve Goose spoke on three different occasions, regarding compliance, Article 7 transparency reports and obligations under Articles 1, 2 and 3. He informed the MSP that there were serious allegations of AP mine transfers from Eritrea to armed groups in Somalia.
  • Landmine Monitor’s Final Editor Ian Doucet presented LM’s findings on international cooperation and assistance, noting that donor funding for mine action had dropped for the first time from 2004 to 2005, but that 2005 was still the second highest amount of funding ever.
  • Ayman Sorour, ICBL Management Committee, made a statement on behalf of the ICBL supporting the proposal that Jordan be the host for the 8th Meeting of States Parties.

HIGHLIGHTS FOR ICBL

  • Canada announced that CIDA and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had reached an agreement for a further integrated mine action plan. Although it could not comment further on this plan, Canada mentioned that if approved, the plan would maintain or increase Canada’s current levels of support to mine action.
  • Jordan noted that it was pursuing creative international networks and partnerships by mainstreaming mine action into development.
  • Norway pledged to maintain its current level of financial support, prioritizing States Parties, particularly those with a clear demining plan. It noted that it devotes 20% of its mine action funding to victim assistance.
  • Peru announced that national legislation to prevent and suppress activities prohibited under the Mine Ban Treaty – including penal sanctions – was passed in July 2006.
  • Argentina stated that it had proposed a new draft law to supplement its existing legislation, and thus working towards fulfilling its Article 9 obligations.
  • DDA Geneva presented its new website, which is intended to make it easier to find Article 7 reports as well as a variety of other MBT, CCW, and CD-related materials.
  • DDA repeated its past request for updated names for the experts for potential fact-finding missions, which the United Nations is required to collect under Article 8.
  • The CzechRepublic stated that it stopped production of antivehicle mines with tripwires 10 years ago. It declared that it has no intention to use or sell its existing stockpile of approximately 1,000 Horizon mines, and will retire them by 2010.

CONCERNS FOR ICBL

  • Senegal mentioned that the cost of its demining programme until 2009 totaled 22 million USD. It stated that it did not have the necessary financial resources for this and called for support from partners in development aid.
  • The CzechRepublic did not explain why, if intends to never use them, it must keep antivehicle mines with tripwires until 2010.
  • The ICRC noted that only half of States Parties had implemented Article 9, which requires all States Parties to adopt national implementing measures, including penal sanctions.
  • No State Party spoke on issues of concern for the ICBL related to Article 1 (interpretation of the prohibition on assisting banned acts), only one spoke on issues related to Article 2 (mines with sensitive fuzes), only three spoke on Article 3 (mines retained for training), and only three on Article 9 (national implementation measures).
  • Only four of the nine states not parties offered sponsorship accepted to attend.

MORE INFORMATION

ICBL Statement on International Cooperation and Assistance at the 7MSP, 21 September 2006

ICBL Statement on Compliance at the 7MSP, 21 September 2006