| EMINENT PERSONS GROUP Statement of the Rt. Hon. the Count Albi, Executive Director, Eminent Persons Group, Before the WFSA Workshop on Defining “Small Arms” as they Pertain to “Firearms” for the 2001 UN Conference on Small Arms, Imperial War Museum, London, April 27, 2001 It is a great honor and distinct privilege for me to participate in this workshop, which comes at a critical stage in the run-up to the July Conference. For time is beginning to run out on advancing feasible and cost-effective practical measures, which will help save lives on the ground. I commend the small arms industry for bringing us together in these august halls, a lasting legacy to Empire. This meeting is manifestation of a strong cooperative working relationship between Member States, the UN, and civil society, especially industry, which is crucial to Conference success. Much is at stake at the Conference for innocent victims the world over. In the interest of saving lives, this conference must be successful in stemming the ever rapidly growing proliferation of illicit small arms outside of State regulatory controls. Collectively, we must acknowledge the full extent of the humanitarian urgency. Normative language on State responsibility must be found to ensure that arms transfers not violate existing legal obligations and standards, especially under international humanitarian law. Yardsticks for measuring Conference success are whether the Programme of Action will contain commitments to take concrete measures to alleviate human suffering. Will the document help save lives? Will it result in timely goal-oriented action? Is there an agreed upon follow-on process to measure States’ progress toward implementing the Programme of Action and to holding States accountable? State responsibility is predicated on transparency and accountability in SALW production and transfer. In turn, transparency and accountability in SALW production and transfer is predicated on marking, record-keeping and tracing. Marking without record keeping and record-keeping without an information-exchange system are futile. States responsibility in ensuring transparency is especially important for transfer of those weapons of war, which cause the most harm, notably fully automatic assault rifles, grenade launchers etc. These weapons have characteristics quite distinguishable from those being used for sports and recreational purposes. While a blanket prohibition of transfers to “non-state actors’ may be unrealistic, civilian non-possession for certain weapons categories should be considered. Continued constructive engagement of industry is crucial to Conference success. For controls on the licit trade put a major burden of responsibility on manufacturing. Therefore, measures to be taken must be realistic and cost-effective. Unfortunately, some proponents of radical approaches are intent on pushing too far too fast, at the expense of Conference consensus. Regulatory efforts cannot be advanced at the expense of who can own what type and quantity of small arm. The right to bear arms is constitutionally guaranteed in several member States and it would open up a line of separation, beyond which some States, otherwise amenable to progress, could not deliver. States need not worry about their sovereign right to produce weapons for legitimate purposes, e.g. self-defense, hunting or commercial purposes. The Framers of the American Constitution were equally concerned about the individual’s right to self-protection, as they were concerned about States rights to regulate. A similar compromise must be found at the Conference. Towards that end, we should continue to work together on marking, record keeping and tracing; brokering and norms for transfer under international humanitarian law. |
 |