 |  |
MONDAY 20 JUNE & FRIDAY 24 JUNE1. Opening of the meetingThe meeting was opened by its Co-Chairs, John MacBride of Canada and Sek Wannamethee of Thailand. The Co-Chairs were supported by their Co-Rapporteurs, Jon Erik Stromo of Norway and Giancarlo Leon of Peru. In opening the meeting, the Co-Chairs reminded delegations that they are proceeding, in keeping with past practice, in undertaking the task of consulting with a view to identifying a list of nominees to serve as Co-Rapporteurs following the Second Review Conference. 2. Overview of the general status of implementationThe President of the Tenth Meeting of the States Parties (10MSP), H.E. Gazmend Turdiu of Albania, provided an overview of the general status of implementation of the Convention. In his statement, the 10MSP President signaled that the States Parties’ challenge is to convert the work carried out in a meeting room in Geneva at the 10MSP into concrete action on the ground. In addition, he asked States Parties not to lose sight of why the Convention exists: to assist the victims, to release land from its deadly bondage, to eradicate all stocks of anti-personnel mines and to eliminate all use, production and transfer of mines. 3. Overview of the status of universalizationThe outgoing Coordinator of the Universalization Contact Group, Canada, delivered a statement, followed by an update on the status on universalization which was provided by the in-coming Contact Group Coordinator, Belgium. Updates on universalization were then provided by the 10MSP President and the President’s Special Envoy on Universalization of the Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention, His Royal Highness Prince Mired Raad Al Hussein of Jordan. The following other States Parties and organizations provided updates or shared views on universalization: ICBL, ICRC, European Union, UN Mine Action Team, Cambodia, Turkey, Australia and Japan. The following States not parties provided updates on their efforts to proceed with ratification of or accession to the Convention: Finland, the Lao PDR, Tuvalu, Poland, Morocco and Mongolia. 4. Implementation Support Unit: agreement between the States Parties and the GICHDThe Co-Chairs recalled that, at the 10MSP, the States Parties endorsed the final report of the ISU Task Force and, in doing so, mandated the President, in consultation with the States Parties, to conclude an amended agreement with the GICHD regarding the ISU. The Co-Chairs further recalled that, in connection with endorsement of the Task Force report, the 10MSP President stated that, following discussions with the GICHD, the draft amended agreement will be circulated to all States Parties, an informal meeting will be called and the draft amended agreement will be submitted to all States Parties for approval at the intersessional meetings in June 2011. The 10MSP President provided an update on efforts to conclude an amended agreement. Following his update, the following delegations shared their views: Algeria, Germany, Switzerland, Canada, Croatia, Brazil, Turkey, New Zealand, South Africa, Mexico, Norway, Australia, Colombia, the Netherlands and Belgium. 5. Implementation Support Unit: funding modelsThe Co-Chairs recalled that, at the 10MSP, in endorsing the final report of the ISU Task Force, the 10MSP tasked the President to establish an informal open-ended working group to examine new models for the financing of the ISU and present recommendations and draft decisions on the most feasible comprehensive financing model for adoption by the 11MSP, so it may be effective from the financial year 2012. The 10MSP President provided an update on the informal open-ended working group on ISU funding models. Following his update, the following delegations shared their views: Cambodia, Jordan, Thailand and Argentina.
A focus on national contexts and other ways to support the application of the Cartagena Action PlanThe Co-Chairs recalled that, at the 10MSP, the States Parties requested the Coordinating Committee to allocate time during the week of meetings for Co-Chairs and others to experiment with new ways to more intensively focus on national contexts or to otherwise support progress in the application of the Cartagena Action Plan. Pursuant to this decision, the Co-Chairs of the Standing Committee on General Status and Operation of the Convention organized a small group discussion that was intended to focus on and assist States Parties in applying the national implementing legislation (Article 9) aspects of the Cartagena Action Plan.
|