Printed from: www.icbl.org/Work/MBT/Disarmament/Definition-of-Antipersonnel-Mines
The ICBL urges States Parties to publicly acknowledge that according to the definitions in the treaty (Article 2), any mine equipped with a fuze that causes the mine to explode from an unintentional or innocent act of a person is considered to be an antipersonnel mine and therefore prohibited.
Since the conclusion of the negotiations of the Mine Ban Treaty, many States Parties, the ICBL, and the ICRC have emphasized that, according to the treaty’s definitions, any mine (even if it is labeled as an antivehicle mine (AVM) equipped with a fuze or antihandling device (AHD) that causes the mine to explode from an unintentional or innocent act of a person is considered to be an antipersonnel mine and therefore prohibited. However, for a small number of States Parties this remains a contentious issue. The way that States Parties agree—or disagree—on what mines are banned may have a significant impact on how the Mine Ban Treaty is implemented and universalized.
This means that antivehicle mines equipped with trip wires, break wires, tilt rods or highly sensitive anti-handling devices should be considered banned under the Mine Ban Treaty. Bounding fragmentation mines that can be set off on command or by a trip wire (such as Claymore and OMZ-72 mines) can only be considered legal when used in command-detonated mode.
More information: