Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken


---

Ministerie van Ministerie van

Buitenlandse Zaken Defensie

Postbus 20061 Postbus 20701

2500 EB 's-Gravenhage 2500 ES 's-Gravenhage

Telefoon 070-3486486 Telefoon 070-3188188

Aan:

de Voorzitter van de Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal

Binnenhof 4

Den Haag

I.a.a.:

de Voorzitter van de Eerste Kamer der

Staten-Generaal

Binnenhof 22

2513 AA Den Haag

Ons nummer DVB/WW-044/02 Datum 15 maart 2002

Onderwerp: Resultaten van de tweede Toetsingsconferentie van het Conventionele Wapens Verdrag, 11-21 december 2001

Zeer geachte Voorzitter,

Naar aanleiding van de op 21 december 2001 afgeronde tweede Toetsingsconferentie van het Conventionele Wapens Verdrag (CWV) en met verwijzing naar de voorbeschouwing van deze conferentie in mijn brief van 7 december 2001 (28000 V nr.37, vergaderjaar 2001-2002), heb ik de eer u als volgt te informeren.

De Toetsingsconferentie is succesvol afgesloten met overeenstemming tussen alle verdragspartijen over het slotdocument (zie bijlage 1). Het bleek niet eenvoudig om consensus te bereiken over de complexe voorstellen die ter tafel lagen, maar uiteindelijk bleken alle verdragspartijen bereid te zijn tot een compromis. Er werd overeenstemming gevonden over de verruiming van de reikwijdte van alle bestaande CWV-protocollen tot interne conflicten. Daartoe is een wijziging van het Verdrag noodzakelijk. De regering is voornemens de aanpassing van artikel 1 van het CWV inzake reikwijdte binnen afzienbare tijd aan de Staten-Generaal en de Staten van de Nederlandse Antillen en van Aruba ter goedkeuring voor te leggen.

Ook kon onder Nederlands voorzitterschap overeenstemming worden bereikt over een ruim geformuleerd mandaat voor verdere besprekingen inzake Explosive Remnants of War (ERW, ontplofbare oorlogsresten) in een Groep van Regeringsdeskundigen, die door de Toetsingsconferentie werd ingesteld (de "Deskundigengroep"). De regering hoopt dat daarmee een eerste stap is gezet op weg naar de ontwikkeling van een internationaal juridisch instrument voor ontplofbare oorlogsresten. De Deskundigengroep zal het komende jaar ook de problematiek van antivoertuigmijnen bespreken. Voorts werd besloten het komende jaar in een minder formele structuur het onderwerp wondballistiek (gebruik van kleinkalibermunitie) en het toezicht op de naleving van het Verdrag te bespreken.

De besluiten van de conferentie illustreren de nieuw gevonden dynamiek in de multilaterale besprekingen die zich afspelen op het snijvlak van conventionele wapenbeheersing en humanitair oorlogsrecht. De totstandkoming van het Ottawa Verdrag (1997) inzake antipersoneelmijnen en de toegenomen aandacht voor de Kleine Wapens problematiek (VN conferentie 2001) zijn daar ook voorbeelden van.

Verruiming van de reikwijdte van het CWV

Een voorstel van de Verenigde Staten en Nederland, (waar Zuid-Korea en Argentinië zich later bij aansloten) voor de verruiming van de reikwijdte van alle bestaande protocollen naar interne conflicten kon bij consensus worden aanvaard. Momenteel is alleen het Geamendeerde Protocol II op zowel internationale als interne conflicten van toepassing. De overige protocollen (I, II, III en IV) zijn slechts op internationale conflicten van toepassing. Volgens de indieners van het voorstel is het onlogisch dat CWV verdragspartijen het gebruik van bepaalde wapens tegen strijdkrachten uit andere landen strak aan banden leggen, terwijl deze bepalingen niet zouden gelden voor strijdkrachten onder de eigen bevolking in een intern conflict. Ook wezen zij er op dat tegenwoordig verreweg de meeste slachtoffers van conventionele wapens juist vallen in interne conflicten.

Aanvankelijk wilde Nederland, evenals de overige indieners van het voorstel, de wijziging van het CWV zo formuleren, dat voor eventuele nieuwe protocollen bij het CWV naast de internationale ook de interne reikwijdte als uitgangspunt zou gelden. In uitzonderlijke gevallen zou daarvan kunnen worden afgeweken. Voor enkele landen was dat niet aanvaardbaar. In de toekomst zal tijdens onderhandelingen over nieuw toe te voegen protocollen daarom steeds opnieuw een besluit moeten worden genomen over de reikwijdte. Wel zal in dat geval kunnen worden gewezen op het precedent dat alle bestaande protocollen ook op interne conflicten van toepassing zijn.

Ontplofbare oorlogsresten (Explosive Remnants of War, ERW)

Zoals verwacht ging de meeste aandacht van de conferentie uit naar het onderwerp ontplofbare oorlogsresten. De regering heeft het afgelopen jaar veel inspanningen verricht voor het verkrijgen van overeenstemming op de Toetsingsconferentie over een mandaat voor een Deskundigengroep die het vraagstuk kan bestuderen en aanbevelingen kan opstellen voor verdere stappen. Tijdens de derde PrepCom in september 2001 presenteerde de Nederlandse "Friend of the Chair" een eerste voorstel voor een mandaat voor het werk van de Deskundigengroep. Tussen september en december kon deze tekst op basis van intensieve bilaterale consultaties steeds verder worden verbeterd, zodat aan de vooravond van de conferentie al een zekere mate van overeenstemming bestond tussen de meest invloedrijke verdragspartijen. Ondanks de voorbereidingen bleek dat tijdens de conferentie nog een aantal verschillen overbrugd moesten worden. Het gevaar dreigde dat vooruitgang op het ERW-dossier zou worden gekoppeld aan vooruitgang bij de besprekingen over antivoertuigmijnen. Uiteindelijk kon overeenstemming worden bereikt over een breed geformuleerd mandaat, dat de bespreking mogelijk maakt van alle denkbare maatregelen om de ERW-problematiek aan te pakken. Alle "factoren, gepaste maatregelen en voorstellen" kunnen in de Deskundigengroep worden besproken, in het bijzonder:

de factoren alsmede de typen van munitie die na afloop van een conflict humanitaire problemen kunnen veroorzaken;

technische en andere maatregelen voor de relevante typen munitie (waaronder sub-munitie), die het risico dat zulke munitie als ontplofbare oorlogsresten achterblijft kunnen verminderen;

de vraag of het bestaande internationale humanitaire recht adequaat is voor het minimaliseren van risico's van ERW na afloop van een conflict, voor zowel burgers als militairen;

het waarschuwen van de bevolking in of dichtbij gebieden met ontplofbare oorlogsresten, de ruiming van ERW, het spoedig geven van informatie die het snel en veilig ruimen van ERW vereenvoudigt, alsook overige aspecten en verantwoordelijkheden;

assistentie en samenwerking.

De Nederlandse Ontwapeningsambassadeur te Genève zal zijn inspanningen voor een internationaal juridisch bindend instrument inzake ontplofbare oorlogsresten kunnen voortzetten met zijn benoeming als coördinator van de ERW-werkzaamheden in de Deskundigengroep. De Deskundigengroep is gemandateerd aanbevelingen uit te brengen, onder andere over de mogelijkheid formele onderhandelingen te openen over een juridisch bindend instrument inzake ontplofbare oorlogsresten. Deze aanbevelingen dienen met consensus te worden aangenomen door de Deskundigengroep alvorens zij worden voorgelegd aan de verdragspartijen.

In het komende jaar zijn vijf vergaderweken in Genève gereserveerd voor besprekingen van de Deskundigengroep, inclusief een formele bijeenkomst van verdragspartijen in december 2002. De eerste maanden van dit jaar zullen worden gebruikt om in bilaterale gesprekken en in enkele kleine bijeenkomsten de invulling van de activiteiten voor het komende jaar te onderzoeken. Waarschijnlijk zullen naast de genoemde formele activiteiten nog aanvullende bijeenkomsten worden georganiseerd, bijvoorbeeld internationale seminars en informele bijeenkomsten te Genève.

De regering hoopt dat dit jaar overeenstemming kan worden gevonden over een onderhandelingsmandaat voor het opstellen van een nieuw protocol over ontplofbare oorlogsresten. Dat is geen eenvoudige opgave, gezien de grote verschillen van inzicht tussen de verdragspartijen over de aard en omvang van het complex van problemen van ontplofbare oorlogsresten, de militair-operationele belangen en de manieren om onnodig humanitair, door ontplofbare oorlogsresten veroorzaakt, leed aan te pakken. Zo zullen verplichtingen voor het aanbrengen van technische verbeteringen in het ontwerp van wapens, die het aantal ontplofbare oorlogsresten zouden verminderen, voor rijke landen eenvoudiger te accepteren zijn dan voor arme landen. Ook zijn er grote verschillen ten aanzien van de afweging tussen het militaire nut van de inzet van bepaalde wapens en het humanitaire leed dat overgebleven explosieven van deze wapens kunnen veroorzaken. Ten aanzien van het verminderen van humanitair leed dat ontplofbare oorlogsresten kunnen veroorzaken, ziet de regering twee hoofdcategorieën van maatregelen die genomen kunnen worden, namelijk die welke genomen kunnen worden om te voorkomen dat ontplofbare oorlogsresten ontstaan, alsmede mogelijke maatregelen gericht op het voorkomen van slachtoffers indien toch ontplofbare oorlogsresten zijn ontstaan (verwezen zij naar de eerder genoemde brief over de Tweede Toetsingsconferentie Conventionele Wapens Verdrag van 7 december 2001). Het mandaat dat tijdens de Toetsingsconferentie werd overeengekomen biedt ruim voldoende mogelijkheden om alle relevante aspecten van beide hoofdcategorieën in de Deskundigengroep te bespreken.

Antivoertuigmijnen

De Toetsingsconferentie dreigde na enige dagen vast te lopen op het onderwerp antivoertuigmijnen (formeel gedefinieerd als: "mijnen, anders dan antipersoneelmijnen"). In mijn voorbeschouwing op de conferentie sprak de regering al zijn zorgen uit over de haalbaarheid van het voorstel van de Verenigde Staten en Denemarken inzake de detecteerbaarheid en technische aanpassingen van antivoertuigmijnen. Een aantal landen had in de loop van het jaar grote bezwaren tegen deze voorstellen geuit. Niettemin werd het voorstel ongewijzigd gepresenteerd, ditmaal mede ingediend door tien andere landen. De tegenstanders, waaronder China, India, Pakistan en de Russische Federatie spraken vervolgens opnieuw hun bezwaren uit tegen de voorstellen. In de ogen van deze landen zou aanvaarding van de voorstellen tot gevolg hebben dat het arme landen onmogelijk zou worden gemaakt mijnen te produceren of aan te schaffen, terwijl de rijke landen dat wel zouden kunnen. Ook werd de noodzaak van de voorgestelde aanpassingen in twijfel getrokken. De Europese Unie steunde het voorstel, maar zag af van mede-indiening omdat nog onvoldoende debat was gevoerd over mogelijke aanvullende maatregelen.

De Verenigde Staten dreigden de vooruitgang inzake het ERW-mandaat te blokkeren indien geen vooruitgang werd geboekt op het voorstel inzake antivoertuigmijnen op basis van bovengenoemd voorstel.

Na veel informeel overleg en marge van de conferentie konden alle partijen uiteindelijk akkoord gaan met een summier mandaat voor verdere besprekingen over antivoertuigmijnen. Deze besprekingen zullen het komende jaar eveneens in de Deskundigengroep worden gevoerd, onder de coördinatie van Bulgarije.

Kleinkalibermunitie (wondballistiek)

In mijn brief van 7 december 2001 werd gemeld dat enkele verdragspartijen niet bereid zouden zijn in CWV-kader over kleinkalibermunitie te spreken. Tijdens de Toetsingsconferentie bleek het daarom ook niet mogelijk een mandaat te verkrijgen voor verdere besprekingen over dit onderwerp in de Deskundigengroep die voor ontplofbare oorlogsresten en antivoertuigmijnen is opgericht. Als voorzitter van Main Committee II, dat voor deze drie onderwerpen verantwoordelijk was, heeft Nederland gezocht naar een compromis dat voor alle partijen aanvaardbaar was. De gesprekken daarover vonden in hoofdzaak plaats tussen de Verenigde Staten en de indiener van het voorstel, Zwitserland.

Alle partijen konden akkoord gaan met het besluit dat alleen geïnteresseerde landen verder zouden overleggen over kleinkalibermunitie, maar dat deze landen wel mogen rapporteren over hun bevindingen aan de Bijeenkomst van Verdragspartijen in december a.s. Alle relevante onderwerpen kunnen tijdens deze bijeenkomsten aan de orde komen, onder andere: militaire benodigdheden, technische aspecten, medische factoren, juridische verplichtingen en financiële implicaties. De regering is voornemens deel te blijven nemen aan dit overleg op deskundigenniveau.

Naleving

Een aantal landen, waaronder de Russische Federatie en China, blokkeerde verdergaande besluiten ter bevordering van de naleving van het CWV-verdrag. Ook wilden de tegenstanders niet dat de Deskundigengroep de bevordering van de naleving van het Verdrag zou bespreken. Uiteindelijk kon consensus worden bereikt over het voeren van consultaties over mogelijkheden de naleving van het CWV-verdrag te bevorderen en werd de kandidaat voorzitter van het CWV (India) gemandateerd deze consultaties te leiden en daarover te rapporteren.

Conclusie

De regering is tevreden met het behaalde resultaat van de Toetsingsconferentie, in het bijzonder met het uitgebreide mandaat voor het verdere werk inzake ontplofbare oorlogsresten. Daarmee is hopelijk een eerste stap gezet op weg naar een juridisch bindend instrument dat bruikbaar is voor het verminderen van het humanitaire leed dat ontplofbare oorlogsresten kunnen veroorzaken. Nederland heeft een voortrekkersrol kunnen spelen en de regering is voornemens ook het komende jaar een dergelijke rol te blijven vervullen.

De conclusie kan worden getrokken dat het Conventionele Wapens Verdrag, dat in 1980 tot stand kwam, zich sinds de tweede helft van de jaren '90 voorzichtig ontwikkelt tot het dynamische instrument dat het oorspronkelijk bedoeld was te zijn; een juridisch instrument dat flexibel kan inspelen op nieuwe ontwikkelingen en behoeften. Tegelijkertijd dient te worden vastgesteld dat het onwaarschijnlijk is snel vooruitgang te boeken, doordat voortdurend consensus moet worden gevonden.

Illustratief hiervoor is dat het uitbannen van antipersoneelmijnen alleen mogelijk was buiten het CWV in een separaat instrument, het Ottawa Verdrag. De regering streeft naar een zo breed mogelijk gedragen steun voor maatregelen inzake ontplofbare oorlogsresten en geeft daarom momenteel de voorkeur aan het CWV als het enige forum voor overleg over deze problematiek.

DE MINISTER VAN DE MINISTER VAN

BUITENLANDSE ZAKEN, DEFENSIE,

J.J. van Aartsen Mr. F.H.G. de Grave

PART I

Report of the Second Review Conference

REPORT OF THE SECOND REVIEW CONFERENCE OF THE STATES PARTIES TO THE CONVENTION ON PROHIBITIONS OR RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF CERTAIN CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS WHICH MAY BE DEEMED TO BE EXCESSIVELY INJURIOUS OR TO HAVE INDISCRIMINATE EFFECTS

I. Introduction


1. The First Review Conference of the States Parties to the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects agreed, inter alia, that future review conferences should be held more frequently, with consideration to be given to holding a review conference every five years. In this connection, the Conference decided, consistent with Article 8.3(c), to convene a further conference five years following the entry into force of the amendments adopted at the First Review Conference, but in any case not later than 2001, with preparatory expert meetings starting as early as 2000, if necessary (Final Declaration, Article 8).


2. At its fifty-fifth session, the General Assembly of the United Nations, in operative paragraph 4 of its resolution 55/37 of 20 November 2000, inter alia, recalled the decision of the States Parties to the Convention to convene the next Review Conference not later than 2001, preceded by a preparatory committee, and recommended that the Review Conference be held in Geneva in December 2001. Furthermore, the General Assembly noted that, in conformity with Article 8 of the Convention, the next Review Conference may consider any proposal for amendments to the Convention or the Protocols thereto as well as any proposals relating to other categories of conventional weapons not covered by existing Protocols to the Convention.


3. Following the recommendation of United Nations General Assembly resolution 55/37, the Preparatory Committee held three sessions, on 14 December 2000, from 2 to 6 April 2001 and from 24 to 28 September 2001, respectively. In addition, at its second plenary meeting on 6 April 2001, the Preparatory Committee decided to convene informal open-ended consultations in Geneva during the week from 27 to 31 August 2001.


4. The First Preparatory Committee was held at Geneva on 14 December 2000 and it decided, inter alia, that the Second Review Conference would be held also at Geneva from 11 to 21 December 2001.


5. At its meeting on 14 December 2000, the Preparatory Committee agreed to recommend that the Conference adopt the Rules of Procedure as contained in Annex II of document CCW/CONF.II/PC.1/1, that is to apply, mutatis mutandis, the same Rules of Procedure as adopted by the First Review Conference held in 1995-1996 with oral amendments. In connection with the adoption of the Rules of Procedure, the Committee recommended that the President of the Second Review Conference make the following statement:

"With regard to Rule 34 of the Rules of Procedure, it is affirmed that, in the deliberations and negotiations relating to the Convention and its annexed Protocols, High Contracting Parties have proceeded on the basis of consensus and no decisions have been taken by vote."


6. Furthermore, the Committee approved the estimated costs of the Review Conference and its three Preparatory Committees.


7. At the first plenary meeting of the Second Preparatory Committee on 2 April 2001, the Committee unanimously decided to nominate Ambassador Les Luck of Australia as the President-designate of the Review Conference.


8. At the closing plenary meeting of the Third Preparatory Committee on 28 September 2001, the President-designate presented to the Committee a compilation of the proposals he recommended for consideration at the Second Review Conference (document CCW/CONF.II/PC.3/1, Annex III).

II. Organisation of the Second Review Conference


9. The Second Review Conference was held at Geneva from 11 to 21 December 2001.

On 11 December 2001, the Conference was opened by the President of the First Review Conference, Ambassador Johan Molander of Sweden. Subsequently, the Chairman of the Third Preparatory Committee, Ambassador Les Luck of Australia, submitted the Report of the Preparatory Committee to the Second Review Conference for its consideration.

11. At the same meeting, the Conference confirmed by acclamation the nomination of Ambassador Les Luck of Australia as President of the Review Conference.

12. At its first plenary meeting, on 11 December 2001, the Review Conference adopted its agenda as recommended by the Third Preparatory Committee (CCW/CONF.II/PC.3/1, Annex IV).

13. At the same meeting, the Conference adopted the Rules of Procedure, as recommended by the First Preparatory Committee. In connection with the adoption of the Rules of Procedure, the President of the Second Review Conference made the following statement:

"With regard to Rule 34 of the Rules of Procedure, it is affirmed that, in the deliberations and negotiations relating to the Convention and its annexed Protocols, High Contracting Parties have proceeded on the basis of consensus and no decisions have been taken by vote."

14. At the same plenary meeting, the Conference unanimously confirmed the nomination of Mr.Vladimir Bogomolov, Political Affairs Officer in the Geneva Branch of Department for Disarmament Affairs as Secretary-General of the Conference. The nomination had been made by the Secretary-General of the United Nations by a letter dated 15 June 2001.

15. At the same plenary meeting, the Conference, in accordance with its Rules of Procedure and following the recommendation of the Third Preparatory Committee, unanimously elected 10Vice-

Presidents from the following States Parties: Bangladesh, China, Croatia, France, Mexico, Poland, Slovakia, South Africa, Switzerland, and the United States of America.

16. At the same meeting, the Conference also unanimously elected the Chairmen and Vice-Chairmen of the Drafting Committee, the two Main Committees and the Credentials Committee, as follows:

Drafting Committee: Chairman Mr. Munir Akram (Pakistan)

Vice-Chairman Mr. Seiichiro Noboru (Japan)

Main Committee I: Chairman Mr. Rakesh Sood (India)

Vice-Chairman Mr. Clive Pearson (New Zealand)

Main Committee II: Chairman Mr. Chris Sanders (The Netherlands)

Vice-Chairman Mrs. Anda Filip (Romania)

Credentials Committee: Chairman Mr. Peter Kolarov (Bulgaria)

Vice-Chairman Mr. Jean Lint (Belgium)

17. The Conference also appointed, on the proposal of the President, representatives from the following three States Parties as members of the Credentials Committee: China, Cuba and Germany.

18. At the same meeting, in accordance with Rule 16 of the Rules of Procedure, the Conference adopted the arrangements for meeting the costs of the Conference, as they were reflected in the documents of the Preparatory Committee (CCW/CONF.II/PC.1/1, Annex III and CCW/CONF.II/PC.2/1, Annex IV).

19. At its first plenary meeting on 11 December, the Conference received a message from the Secretary-General of the United Nations which was delivered by the Under Secretary-General of the United Nations for Disarmament Affairs, Mr. Jayantha Dhanapala.

The following 65 States Parties to the Convention participated in the work of the Conference: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belarus, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, China, Colombia, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Holy See, Hungary, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, Senegal, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tunisia, Ukraine, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America and Yugoslavia (Federal Republic of).

21. The following four Signatory States also participated in the work of the Conference: Egypt, Morocco, Turkey and Viet Nam.

22. The following 18 States not parties to the Convention participated as observers: Albania, Armenia, Bahrain, Chile, Eritrea, Honduras, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Kuwait, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Thailand, Tonga, Venezuela and Yemen.

23. The representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) also participated in the work of the Conference.

24. The representatives of the Geneva International Center for Humanitarian Demining (GICHD), the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) (including its member organisations: the American Bar Association, German Initiative to Ban Landmines, Handicap International (Belgium), Handicap International (France), Human Rights Watch, International Peace Bureau, Landmine Action (UK), Landmine Monitor, Lutheran World Federation, Mennonite Central Committee, Mines Action Canada, and the Quaker United Nations Office), the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation, and the World Forum on the Future of Sport Shooting Activities (WFSA) attended public meetings of the Conference.

III. Work of the Second Review Conference

25. Under the presidency of Mr. Les Luck, the Conference held four plenary meetings. The documentation and summary records of these meetings are included in the present report.

26. Following the adoption of the Agenda and Rules of Procedure, the Conference also adopted the Programme of Work and decided to distribute its work between the two main Committees as follows:

(a) Main Committee I: Review of the scope and operation of the Convention and its annexed Protocols, consideration of any proposals relating to the Convention or to Protocols annexed to the Convention, and preparation and consideration of the final documents;

(b) Main Committee II: Consideration of proposals for additional Protocols to the Convention.

27. On 11 and 12 December 2001, the Conference held a general exchange of views. The following delegations participated in that exchange of views: Argentina, Australia, Bangladesh, Belarus, Belgium (on behalf of the European Union and associated States), Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Croatia, Cuba, Egypt, France, Guatemala, India, Israel, Japan, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Poland, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine, United States of America and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). The representative of the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) also participated in the exchange of views. Non-governmental organisations, namely the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation, the Mennonite Central Committee and the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL), also participated in the exchange of views. Following the national statements, the President of the Third Annual Conference of States Parties to Amended Protocol II, Ambassador Christian Faessler of Switzerland presented the report of the Third Annual Conference.

28. Main Committee I held seven meetings from 13 to 20 December 2001. Its report, together with the Draft Final Declaration of the Second Review Conference, was submitted to the Conference at its fourth plenary meeting on 21 December 2001, at which time the Conference took note of the report (CCW/CONF.II/MC.I/1).

29. Main Committee II held four meetings from 13 to 20 December 2001. The Chairman of the Committee presented its report to the Conference at its fourth plenary meeting on 21 December 2001, at which time the Conference took note of the report (CCW/CONF.II/MC.II/1).

30. The Credentials Committee held two meetings and submitted its report to the Conference at its fourth plenary meeting on 21 December 2001 (CCW/CONF.II/CC/1). At the same meeting, the Conference approved the report of the Committee and adopted the draft resolution contained therein.

The Drafting Committee was not convened at the Second Review Conference.

IV. Decisions and Recommendations

32. At its fourth plenary meeting, on 21 December 2001, the Conference adopted by consensus the Final Declaration of the Review Conference.

33. Also at the same meeting, the Conference approved the cost estimates for the meeting of States Parties and the intersessional work established by the Final Declaration (see page 43 and 45, respectively). The Conference recommended the appointment of Ambassador Rakesh Sood of India as Chairman-designate of the meeting of States Parties to be held at Geneva from 12-13 December 2002, and appointed two Coordinators for the Group of Governmental Experts: Ambassador Chris Sanders of the Netherlands on Explosive Remnants of War, and Mr Peter Kolarov of Bulgaria on Mines Other than Anti-Personnel Mines.

34. At the same meeting, the Conference adopted its final report.

PART II

Final Declaration

FINAL DECLARATION

THE HIGH CONTRACTING PARTIES TO THE CONVENTION ON PROHIBITIONS OR RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF CERTAIN CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS WHICH MAY BE DEEMED TO BE EXCESSIVELY INJURIOUS OR TO HAVE INDISCRIMINATE EFFECTS, WHICH MET IN GENEVA FROM 11 TO 21 DECEMBER 2001, TO REVIEW THE SCOPE AND OPERATION OF THE CONVENTION AND THE PROTOCOLS ANNEXED THERETO AND TO CONSIDER ANY PROPOSAL FOR AMENDMENTS OF THE CONVENTION OR OF THE EXISTING PROTOCOLS, AS WELL AS PROPOSALS FOR ADDITIONAL PROTOCOLS RELATING TO OTHER CATEGORIES OF CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS NOT COVERED BY THE EXISTING ANNEXED PROTOCOLS

Reaffirmingtheir conviction that the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects can significantly reduce the suffering of civilians and combatants,

Reaffirming their determination to call upon all States that have not done so to become parties to the Convention and its annexed Protocols as soon as possible, so that the instrument attains universal adherence,

Reaffirming the need to reinforce international cooperation in the area of prohibitions or restrictions on the use of certain conventional weapons which may be deemed to be excessively injurious or to have indiscriminate effects,

Recognising that many armed conflicts are non-international in character, and that such conflicts should also be within the scope of the Convention,

Gravely concerned that the indiscriminate effects or the irresponsible use of certain conventional weapons often fall on civilians, including in non-international armed conflicts,

Recognising the need to protect civilians from the effect of weapons, the use of which is restricted or prohibited by this Convention and its annexed Protocols, which take into account all circumstances ruling at the time, including humanitarian and military considerations,

Reaffirming their unequivocal condemnation of all acts, methods and practices of terrorism as criminal and unjustifiable, regardless of their motivation, in all their forms and manifestations, wherever and by whomever committed,

Deeply concerned at the humanitarian and development problems caused by the presence of explosive remnants of war, which constitute an obstacle to the return of refugees and other displaced persons, to humanitarian aid operations, to reconstruction and economic development, as well as to the restoration of normal social conditions,

Welcoming the entry into force of Amended Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices (Amended Protocol II) on 3December 1998,

Noting that the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction entered into force on 1March 1999,

Reaffirming also the need to reinforce international cooperation in the area of mine action and to devote greater resources towards that end,

Recognising the need to further explore the issue of mines other than anti-personnel mines, including through reinforced international cooperation in the area of mine action, and the allocation of necessary resources to that end,

Welcoming the entry into force of the Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons (ProtocolIV) on 30 July 1998,

Recognising the crucial role of the International Committee of the Red Cross and encouraging it to continue to work to facilitate further ratifications and accessions to the Convention and its annexed Protocols, to disseminate their contents and to lend its expertise to future Conferences and other meetings related to the Convention and its annexed Protocols,

Acknowledging the invaluable humanitarian efforts of non-governmental organisations in armed conflicts and welcoming the expertise they have brought to the Review Conference itself,

Noting the report of the International Committee of the Red Cross on "Ensuring respect for the 1868 St. Petersburg Declaration prohibiting the use of certain explosive projectiles" (dated 18 September 2001). Inviting States to consider this report and other relevant information, and take any appropriate action,

SOLEMNLY DECLARE:

Their commitment to respect and comply with the objectives and provisions of the Convention and its annexed Protocols as an authoritative international instrument governing the use of certain conventional weapons which may be deemed to be excessively injurious or to have indiscriminate effects,

Their determination to promote universal adherence to the Convention and its annexed Protocols, and to call upon all States that have not yet done so to take all measures to become parties, as soon as possible, to the Convention and to its annexed Protocols. In this regard, the Conference encourages States to cooperate to promote universal adherence,

Their reaffirmation of the principles of international humanitarian law, as mentioned in the Convention, that "the right of the parties to an armed conflict to choose methods or means of warfare is not unlimited, and on the principle that prohibits the employment in armed conflicts of weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering" and that "the civilian population and the combatants shall at all times remain under the protection and authority of the principles of international law derived from established custom, from the principles of humanity and from the dictates of public conscience",

Their determination to extend the application of the Convention and its annexed Protocols to armed conflicts of a non-international character and, to that end, their satisfaction with the amendment of Article I of the Convention,

The importance they attach to the earliest possible entry into force of the amendment of Article I of the Convention, and their desire that all States, pending its entry into force, respect and ensure respect for the revised scope of application of the Convention to the fullest extent possible,

Their commitment to the full implementation of, and compliance with, the Convention and its annexed Protocols, and to keep the provisions of the Convention and its annexed Protocols under review in order to ensure their provisions remain relevant to modern conflicts,

Their determination to consult and cooperate with each other in order to facilitate the full implementation of the obligations contained in the Convention and its annexed Protocols, thereby promoting compliance,

Their commitment to reinforce cooperation and assistance, including the transfer of technology as appropriate, with a view to facilitating the implementation of the Convention and its annexed Protocols,

Their determination to address as a matter of urgency the deleterious humanitarian effects of explosive remnants of war, through a thorough examination of these effects and possible measures to prevent and remedy them,

Their commitment to further explore the issue of mines other than anti-personnel mines (referred to as anti-vehicle mines),

Their satisfaction at the entry into force of Amended Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices (Amended Protocol II), and at the progress made by the three Annual Conferences of States Parties to Amended Protocol II, and their determination to encourage all States to become parties to Amended Protocol II as soon as possible,

Their conviction that all States should strive towards the goal of the eventual elimination of anti-personnel mines globally and in this regard noting that a significant number of States Parties have formally committed themselves to a prohibition of the use, stockpiling, production and transfer of anti-personnel mines and on their destruction,

Their continuing commitment to assist, to the extent feasible, impartial humanitarian demining missions, operating with the consent of the host State and/or the relevant States Parties to the conflict, in particular by providing all necessary information in their possession covering the location of all known minefields, mined areas, mines, booby-traps and other devices in the area in which the mission is performing its functions,

Their satisfaction at the entry into force of the Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons (Protocol IV), and their determination to encourage all States to become parties to the Protocol as soon as possible,

Their reaffirmation of the recognition by the First Review Conference of the need for the total prohibition of blinding laser weapons, the use and transfer of which are prohibited in Protocol IV,

Their recognition of the importance of keeping the blinding effects related to the use of laser systems under consideration, taking into account scientific and technological developments,

Their determination to urge States which do not already do so, to conduct reviews such as that provided for in Article 36 of Protocol I additional to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, to determine whether any new weapon, means or methods of warfare would be prohibited by international humanitarian law or other rules of international law applicable to them,

Their commitment to follow up the review process and, for that purpose, establish a regular review mechanism for the Convention and its amended Protocols, as well as more frequent meetings of States Parties,

RECOGNISE that the important principles and provisions contained in this Final Declaration can also serve as a basis for further strengthening the Convention and its annexed Protocols and express their determination to implement them,

AND

DECIDE to amend Article I of the Convention to read as follows:

"1. This Convention and its annexed Protocols shall apply in the situations referred to in Article 2 common to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 for the Protection of War Victims, including any situation described in paragraph4 of Article I of Additional Protocol I to these Conventions.

2. This Convention and its annexed Protocols shall also apply, in addition to situations referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, to situations referred to in Article3 common to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949. This Convention and its annexed Protocols shall not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence, and other acts of a similar nature, as not being armed conflicts.

3. In case of armed conflicts not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each party to the conflict shall be bound to apply the prohibitions and restrictions of this Convention and its annexed Protocols.

4. Nothing in this Convention or its annexed Protocols shall be invoked for the purpose of affecting the sovereignty of a State or the responsibility of the Government, by all legitimate means, to maintain or re-establish law and order in the State or to defend the national unity and territorial integrity of the State.

5. Nothing in this Convention or its annexed Protocols shall be invoked as a justification for intervening, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the armed conflict or in the internal or external affairs of the High Contracting Party in the territory of which that conflict occurs.

6. The application of the provisions of this Convention and its annexed Protocols to parties to a conflict which are not High Contracting Parties that have accepted this Convention or its annexed Protocols, shall not change their legal status or the legal status of a disputed territory, either explicitly or implicitly.

7. The provisions of Paragraphs 2-6 of this Article shall not prejudice additional Protocols adopted after 1 January 2002, which may apply, exclude or modify the scope of their application in relation to this Article."

DECIDE to commission follow-up work on decisions arising from the Second Review Conference of the Convention, under the oversight of the Chairman-designate of a meeting of the States Parties to the Convention to be held on 12-13 December 2002 in Geneva, in conjunction with the Fourth Annual Conference of States Parties to Amended Protocol II, which may begin on 11December 2002.

DECIDE to establish an open-ended Group of Governmental Experts with separate Coordinators to:

(a) discuss ways and means to address the issue of Explosive Remnants of War (ERW). In this context the Group shall consider all factors, appropriate measures and proposals, in particular:


1. factors and types of munitions that could cause humanitarian problems after a conflict;


2. technical improvements and other measures for relevant types of munitions, including sub-munitions, which could reduce the risk of such munitions becoming ERW;


3. the adequacy of existing International Humanitarian Law in minimising post-conflict risks of ERW, both to civilians and to the military;


4. warning to the civilian population, in or close to, ERW-affected areas, clearance of ERW, the rapid provision of information to facilitate early and safe clearance of ERW, and associated issues and responsibilities;


5. assistance and co-operation.

The Coordinator shall undertake work in an efficient manner so as to submit recommendations, adopted by consensus, at an early date for consideration by the States Parties, including whether to proceed with negotiating a legally-binding instrument or instruments on ERW and/or other approaches.

(b) further explore the issue of mines other than anti-personnel mines. The Coordinator shall submit a report, adopted by consensus, to the States Parties.

DECIDE that the Chairman-designate shall undertake consultations during the intersessional period on possible options to promote compliance with the Convention and its annexed Protocols, taking into account proposals put forward, and shall submit a report, adopted by consensus, to the States Parties.

DECIDE to invite interested States Parties to convene experts to consider possible issues related to small calibre weapons and ammunition, such as:


- military requirements


- scientific and technical factors/methodology

- medical factors


- legal/treaty obligations/standards


- financial implications

and in this respect, report on their work to the States Parties to the Convention. These meetings shall have no implications for the CCW budget.

The intersessional work will be undertaken in three sessions during 2002:

20 - 24 May 2002

8 - 19 July 2002 or 22 July - 2 August 2002

2 - 10 December 2002

The Chairman-designate shall consult States Parties on financial arrangements and the programme of work. The intersessional work will be conducted in accordance with the Rules of Procedure adopted by the Second Review Conference of the States Parties to the Convention.

Review of the Preamble

Preambular paragraph 3

The Conference recalls the obligation to determine in the study, development, acquisition or adoption of a new weapon, means and method of warfare, whether its employment would, in some or all circumstances, be prohibited under any rule of international law applicable to the High Contracting Parties.

Preambular paragraph 8

The Conference reaffirms the need to continue the codification and progressive development of the rules of international law applicable to certain conventional weapons which may be excessively injurious or have indiscriminate effects.

Preambular paragraph 10

The Conference underlines the need to achieve wider adherence to the Convention and its annexed Protocols. The Conference welcomes recent ratifications and accessions to the Convention and its annexed Protocols and urges the High Contracting Parties to accord high priority to their diplomatic efforts to encourage further adherence with a view to achieving universal adherence as soon as possible.

Review of the Articles

Article 1 (Scope of application)

The Conference recognises the necessity and the importance of extending the application of the principles and rules of this Convention to conflicts of a non-international nature.

The Conference also recognises the right of a State Party to take legitimate measures to maintain or re-establish law and order in accordance with paragraph 4 of amended Article 1 of the Convention.

The Conference acknowledges and confirms that the High Contracting Parties agreed to broaden the scope of the Convention by amendment to Article 1. The Conference encourages all States Parties to deposit as soon as possible their instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession of the amendment to Article 1 with the Depositary of the Convention.

Article 2 (Relations with other international agreements)

The Conference reaffirms that nothing in the Convention or its annexed Protocol shall be interpreted as detracting from other obligations imposed upon the High Contracting Parties by international humanitarian law.

Article 3 (Signature)

The Conference notes the provisions of Article 3.

Article 4 (Ratification, acceptance, approval or accession)

The Conference notes that 88 States have ratified, accepted, acceded or succeeded to the Convention.

The Conference calls upon States which are not parties to this Convention to ratify, accept, approve or accede, as appropriate, to the Convention, thus contributing to the achievement of universal adherence to the Convention.

The Conference, in this context, invites the High Contracting Parties to encourage further accessions to the Convention and its annexed Protocols.

Article 5 (Entry into Force)

This Conference notes the provisions of Article 5.

Article 6 (Dissemination)

The Conference encourages international cooperation in the field of dissemination of the Convention and its annexed Protocols and recognises the importance of multilateral collaboration relating to instruction, the exchange of experience at all levels, the exchange of instructors and the organisation of joint seminars. The Conference underlines the importance of the High Contracting Parties' obligation to disseminate this Convention and its annexed Protocols, and, in particular to include the content in their programmes of military instruction at all levels.

The Conference requests the United Nations Secretary General to make all documents relating to the Convention available on the United Nations website.

Article 7 (Treaty relations upon entry into force of this Convention)

The Conference notes the provisions of Article 7.

Article 8 (Review and amendments)

The Conference agrees that future Review Conferences should continue to be held on a regular basis.

The Conference decides, consistent with Article 8.3(c) to convene a further Conference five years following the entry into force of the amendments adopted at the Second Review Conference, but in any case not later than 2006, with preparatory meetings starting as early as 2005, if necessary.

The Conference welcomes the adoption of the text of an amended Article 1 of the Convention in accordance with subparagraph 3(a) of this Article.

The Conference proposes that the next Review Conference consider further measures in relation to other conventional weapons, which may be deemed to cause unnecessary suffering or to have indiscriminate effects.

The Conference decides to convene a meeting of High Contracting Parties on 12-13 December 2002 in Geneva.

Article 9 (Denunciation)

The Conference notes with satisfaction that the provisions of this Article have not been invoked.

Article 10 (Depositary)

The Conference notes the provisions of Article 10.

Article 11 (Authentic texts)

The Conference notes the provisions of Article 11.

Review of the Protocols

Protocol on Non-Detectable Fragments (Protocol I)

The Conference takes note of the provisions of this Protocol.

Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices (Protocol II) and Technical Annex to the Protocol

The Conference takes note of the provisions of this Protocol.

Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices as amended on 3 May 1996 (Amended Protocol II) and Technical Annex to the Protocol

The Conference acknowledges that the High Contracting Parties strengthened Protocol II in a number of areas at the First Review Conference, and takes note of the provisions of Amended Protocol II and welcomes its entry into force.

The Conference also notes with satisfaction that in accordance with Article 13 of Amended Protocol II, three Annual Conferences of High Contracting Parties were held for the purpose of consultations and cooperation on all issues related to Amended Protocol II.

The Conference recommends that future Annual Conferences of High Contracting Parties of Amended Protocol II coincide with any meetings of High Contracting Parties to the Convention.

The Conference takes note of the reporting obligations of High Contracting Parties under Amended Protocol II, and calls on High Contracting Parties to fulfill these obligations in a timely, consistent and complete manner.

The Conference acknowledges the valuable work of relevant agencies and bodies of the United Nations; of the International Committee of the Red Cross pursuant to its mandate to assist war victims and of NGOs in a number of fields, in particular the care and rehabilitation of mine victims, implementation of mine-awareness programmes and mine clearance.

Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Incendiary Weapons (Protocol III)

The Conference takes note of the provisions of this Protocol.

Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons (Protocol IV to the 1980 Convention)

The Conference takes note of the provisions of this Protocol and welcomes its entry into force.

===