1 / 20

Glenn McDonald Small Arms Survey, Geneva

Implementing the ITI First Meeting to Consider the Implementation of the International Tracing Instrument UN Headquarters, New York, July 2008. Glenn McDonald Small Arms Survey, Geneva. ITI: a brief history. OEWG negotiations, 2004-05 Agreement on ITI text, June 2005

terra
Télécharger la présentation

Glenn McDonald Small Arms Survey, Geneva

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Implementing the ITIFirst Meeting to Consider the Implementationof the International Tracing InstrumentUN Headquarters, New York, July 2008 Glenn McDonald Small Arms Survey, Geneva

  2. ITI: a brief history • OEWG negotiations, 2004-05 • Agreement on ITI text, June 2005 • UNGA adoption, December 2005 • Since December 2005, the ITI applies to all UN Member States

  3. ITI: general aspects • Politically binding • Does not cover ammunition OEWG recommendation: that the issue of SALW ammunition be addressed in a comprehensive manner as part of a separate UN process • Applies to crime and conflict (civilian and military SALW)

  4. Definition of SALW • Precise, relatively comprehensive and adaptable (para. 4) • Combines language from 1997 UN Panel Report and UN Firearms Protocol • Covers almost all SALW mentioned in the 1997 Report (except vehicle-mounted LW such as large recoilless rifles)

  5. Three pillars of tracing 1) Marking: for unique identification 2) Record-keeping: to help reconstruct the weapon’s history 3) Cooperation in tracing: applying agreed rules, States send and respond to tracing requests

  6. Marking • ITI requires all SALW to be marked with basic identifying information: - Manufacturer’s marks: mandatory (para. 8a) - Import marks: strongly recommended (para. 8b) • Also required: the marking of government armed and security force stocks (para. 8d) • Other provisions govern the confiscation of illicit SALW (para. 9) and the characteristics and placement of marks (paras. 7, 10)

  7. Marking • Marking at time of import: The older the weapon, the more likely that the record-keeping chain will be broken. An import mark significantly increases the chances of a successful trace. • Many non-manufacturing countries expressed concerns about the potential costs of import marking during the ITI negotiations.

  8. Marking • Marking of government stocks: a key source of arms for war zones and the illicit market generally. If such weapons have not been marked, they cannot be traced after they leave the government stockpile. • All SALW in the possession of government armed and security forces for their own use must be “duly marked” (para. 8d).

  9. Record-keeping • States have agreed to establish and maintain the records that are needed to ensure “timely and reliable” tracing (para. 11). • Manufacturing records to be kept for at least 30 years (para. 12a) • All other records, including records of import and export, for at least 20 years (para. 12b)

  10. Record-keeping • In many countries, record-keeping systems are not computerized, making record maintenance and retrieval difficult. • Yet tracing is impossible without the “accurate and comprehensive” record-keeping required by ITI paragraph 11.

  11. Cooperation in tracing • The ITI sets out detailed modalities for tracing cooperation: its operational core (paras. 14-23) • States may restrict or refuse tracing cooperation in certain circumstances (confidentiality, reasons of national security, etc.) … • … but must explain any such restriction or refusal (paras. 22–23).

  12. Implementation • Current priorities include: - ensuring national laws, etc. meet ITI requirements (para. 24) - info. exchange (national points of contact, national marking practices; paras. 31-32) - national capacity-building • Key roles for UN & Interpol

  13. Implementation • States need to move promptly to fulfil the requirements of ITI, paragraph 24: “In accordance with their constitutional processes, States will put in place, where they do not exist, the laws, regulations and administrative procedures needed to ensure the effective implementation of this instrument.”

  14. Implementation • In particular, UN Member States need to determine: a) what changes to national laws, regulations and administrative procedures are needed to meet ITI requirements b) whether and how to strengthen national capacity for implementation (e.g. inter-ministerial coordination; consultation with industry, NGOs and other stakeholders; training programmes)

  15. International assistance • Important to the effective implementation of the ITI (see paras. 27-29) • Areas for priority attention include: - import marking (para. 8b) - marking of government stocks (para. 8d) - effective record-keeping systems (paras. 11-13) - functional tracing systems (paras. 14-23)

  16. Instrument follow-up • States have committed to reporting every 2 years on their implementation of the ITI (para. 36). • Biennial meetings to be held to consider ITI implementation (para. 37) • States to “review the implementation and future development” of the ITI (para. 38; as part of future PoA Review Conferences)

  17. Conclusion • On paper, the ITI advances international cooperation in almost all of the areas it covers. • Yet, it will only have real value if effectively implemented.

More Related