First
Annual Report on the Implementation of the European Union Code of Conduct on Arms Exports
October 1999
1.
Summary
The European
Union Code of Conduct on Arms Exports was adopted on June 8, 1998. Written into
the Code was an annual reporting procedure, of which this is the first. Over
this short period of implementing the Code considerable progress has been made.
The experiences of the Member States in providing notifications and
consultations on arms exports have been positive. The Code has ushered in a new
degree of transparency between governments in arms transactions, and has
enabled the Member States to act in greater concert when considering national
arms licensing decisions. It has also provided a forum for the Member States to
discuss their common concerns when matters of regional stability and human
rights are at issue. The Code has been embraced by others beyond the Union,
with the Associated Countries of Central and Eastern Europe and Cyprus, the
EFTA countries members of the EEA and Canada all agreeing to align themselves
with its principles.
Reflections on
the Code after one year offer the opportunity not only to highlight
experiences, but also to consider the way forward. Consequently the report is
structured in four parts. First reviewed are issues surrounding the practical
application of the Code. These are followed by guidelines that have been
adopted by the Conventional Arms Exports Working Group (COARM) to enhance
application of the Code. Priorities for co-ordinated action in the future are
then identified. The Report concludes by providing statistics on Member States'
conventional arms exports. Recognising the desire of Member States to increase
transparency, the Council has decided to render the report public.
2.
Introduction
The Council
adopted the European Union Code of Conduct on Arms Exports on 8, June 1998. The
initial proposal for the Code was tabled at the end of January 1998 and then
discussed in several meetings of the Working Group on Conventional Arms
Exports, and in the Political Committee.
The Code builds
upon the common criteria for arms exports of Luxembourg and Lisbon that were
adopted in 1991 and 1992, and establishes an information exchange and
consultation mechanism. This is the first such mechanism applied by any group
of States to their conventional arms exports. The adoption of the Code ushered
in a new phase in the EU development of a common approach to arms exports, as a
component of the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy in accordance with
Articles 11 and 17 of the Treaty on European Union. The Code sets high minimum
standards for the management of, and restraint in, conventional arms transfers
by all Member States. It is designed to strengthen the exchange of relevant
information and to achieve greater transparency in arms transactions. The
convergence of national export policies, on the basis of the Code of Conduct,
complies with the wish of Member States to maintain a defence industry as part
of their industrial base as well as their defence effort. This process of
convergence is also consistent with European defence industrial restructuring
and co-operation.
In accordance
with its Operative Provision 8, the Code is now undergoing its first annual
review. The review covers all aspects of the Code, i.e. both the interpretation
and the application of the criteria for the export of conventional armaments
and the implementation of operative provisions. It also identifies improvements
that may be needed. As part of the review effort, each Member State has circulated
an annual report on its conventional arms exports and its implementation of the
Code.
3.
The Operation of the Code: experiences of the implementation of the Code of
Conduct
The experiences
of the Member States in implementing the Code of Conduct during the first year
of its existence have been positive. The Code has increased mutual
understanding of Member State policies on conventional arms both directly
through the circulation of denial notifications and consultations, and
indirectly through contributing to a culture of greater transparency and
openness.
The unique
consultation mechanism set out in the Code has been deemed to be efficient. A
large number of denial notifications has been circulated and Member States have
engaged in active consultations on specific export licensing issues.
The increased
dialogue on the implementation and national interpretation of the Code of
Conduct has been valuable. This practical co-operation, based on the principles
and operative provisions of the Code, contributes to a convergence of the arms
exports policies and procedures of the European Union Member States.
The Member States
have urged non-members to adopt the principles of the Code and have welcomed
the alignment to these principles of the Associated Countries of Central and
Eastern European and Cyprus, the EFTA Countries members of the European
Economic Area, and Canada. These countries have declared that they share the
principles contained in the EU Code of Conduct and will use them to guide their
national export licensing decisions. In the spirit of the Code, some of these
countries have now begun to circulate information on their conventional arms
export control procedures.
Whilst the
general experience of the implementation of the Code of Conduct has indeed been
a positive one, there remain issues requiring additional clarification and
development. In fact, improving the effectiveness of the Code to further
enhance the high common European standards for arms exports will be an ongoing
process, of which the annual review is an essential element.
During the first
year of the Code of Conduct the COARM working group discussed a number of
issues relating to the practical implementation of the Code. Of particular
importance, Member States have exchanged views on the following issues:
- The practical
details of the consultation process;
- Clarification
of definitions set out in the Code;
- The legal
status of the Code;
- Options for
enhancing the participation of countries that have declared their alignment
with the Code’s principles;
- Concern by some
countries that the denial notification system could be overloaded if
appropriate thresholds are not set, in particular when the end users are
private persons;
- The possibility
of taking into account recipient countries participation in the United Nations
arms register when considering arms exports licences;
-
Interpretations of arms export embargoes, in particular in relation to
equipment used in humanitarian aid operations.
-
In addition, a
separate Working Group under COARM has discussed the finalisation of a common
European list of military equipment. Work continues on items still to be added
to the list. Various national proposals are under discussion with the aim of
creating a comprehensive common European list of military equipment that
reflects current international security and human rights concerns.
4.
Guidelines adopted by COARM to enhance the practical implementation of the Code
of Conduct
During the first
year of implementation, the COARM Working Group has adopted the following
guidelines:
- Serial number
indicating the country of origin and the number of the denial will be
introduced for denial notifications (accompanied by the Community acronym of
the Member State concerned and indication of the year).
- Denials still
subject to appeal under national procedures will be notified under the Code of
Conduct with an indication to that effect.
- Decisions to
revoke extant licenses will be dealt with in the same way as refusals of
licence applications.
- Consensus has
been reached to use the so called Austrian Presidency Proposal as a basis for
the continued discussions on the common list of equipment. Denials on items
subject to national controls by Member States, but not included in the
above-mentioned list, will continue to be notified to all Member States. Member
States which do not control these items will inform others.
- Non-EU
countries which have declared their adherence to the principles and criteria of
the Code, and which have become involved in the restructuring of the European
defence industry, shall be allowed to gain access to the evolving
interpretation of the Code’s principles and criteria. This shall not entail
access to information made available in the course of the procedures referred
to in the operative provisions of the Code.
- Any individual
case of arms exports can be raised for discussion by delegations in the COARM
Working Group, if it is considered to be useful for national licensing
deliberations.
- Denial
notifications that have been circulated in the international export control
regimes will also be circulated as Code of Conduct denial notifications if
relevant to the scope of the Code.
- A period of two
to four weeks from the date the request for consultations has been received is
established for the consultation procedure envisaged in operative paragraph 3
of the Code, unless a different time period is agreed upon between the parties
concerned.
- When an arms
embargo is lifted, denials solely based on the embargo will expire unless they
are renewed by the denying country within a period of one month on the basis of
other criteria of the Code.
5.
Priorities for co-ordinated action in the future
The Code of
Conduct is a unique document that demonstrates the European Union commitment to
maintaining high common standards on arms exports. However, it is a new
document and this review can therefore reflect only the initial experiences
with its implementation. With the aim of strengthening the Code, achieving
greater transparency, enhancing harmonisation and promoting the respect of
human rights, some key areas have been identified for consideration and action
in the near term:
I. The
finalisation of the common European List of military equipment is a top
priority. It is necessary that this list reflect the present threats to
international peace and security and to the respect of human rights. The list
is to be a cornerstone of the Code of Conduct and should not be limited to the
lowest common denominator of existing national control lists.
II. To strengthen
further the implementation of the Code of Conduct, Member States will seek to develop
common understandings of what constitutes an "essentially identical
transaction". Member States will continue to engage in
pre-consultation dialogue to determine whether particular transactions are
essentially identical or not.
III. To help
Member States in their national licensing deliberations a fuller description
of the reasons for refusal should be included in the denial notification.
This would facilitate understanding of the general thinking behind each other's
refusals, and help the Member States decide whether consultation would be
warranted in cases where the proposed export is not essentially identical.
IV. Member
States will continue to exchange information on national interpretations of UN,
EU and OSCE embargoes with a view to developing common understandings and
practices.
In addition,
Member States welcome the Moratorium on the Importation, Exportation and
Manufacture of Light Weapons by the Economic Community of West African States
(ECOWAS), and will continue to discuss further how to take into account the
principles of the Moratorium in their national licensing deliberations.
6.
Information on Members States conventional arms exports and implementation of
the Code of Conduct
|
Country |
Reporting Period |
Total value of arms exports (EUROS) |
Total number of licences issued |
No. of Notified Denials |
No. of Bilateral Consultations |
|
Austria |
1998 |
War
material: not available Other weapons: 208.741.703* |
War
material: 292 Other weapons: 1313 |
War
material: 0 Other weapons: 13 |
2 |
|
Belgium |
1998 |
649.671.652* |
1067 |
29 (of which 5 since the adoption of the Code) |
1 |
|
Denmark |
1998 |
Not available |
219 |
2 |
0 |
|
Finland |
1998 |
30.934.318** |
155 |
5 (of which 3 since the adoption of the Code) |
0 |
|
France |
1998 |
6.277.545.600** |
7.222 -
2.353 prior approvals of the level of sales - 4.869 authorisations of exports of war material |
50 (from 8 June 1998 to 31 May 1999) |
5 (from 8 June 1998 to 31 May 1999) |
|
Germany |
1998 |
2.829.222.407* |
11.400 |
27 (since the adoption of the Code) |
1 |
|
Greece |
1998 |
Not available |
22 |
0 |
0 |
|
Ireland |
1998 |
20.060.000* |
381 |
0 |
0 |
|
Italy |
1998 |
949.414.596* |
Final: 593 For
temporary export: 140 License Extensions: 63 |
7 |
1 |
|
Luxembourg |
1998 |
23.547* |
27 |
0 |
0 |
|
Netherlands |
1998 |
431.862.632* |
Not available |
16 (since the adoption of the Code) |
0 |
|
Portugal |
1998 |
14.690.185* |
116 |
0 |
0 |
|
Spain |
1998 |
163.847.920* |
2019 |
1 |
1 |
|
Sweden |
1998 |
407.987.925** |
542 (export permits for sales) |
0 |
0 |
|
United Kingdom |
1998 |
Not available |
Total number
of licences: 10385*** Standard
Individual Export Licences: 9869 Open Individual
Export Licences: 499 Standard Individual Transshipment Licences: 17 |
43 (since the adoption of the Code) |
7 |
* total value of licences issued
** actual value of
exports
***these figures
include licences for goods on the UK Military List as well as licences for
other goods.
NB. Not all countries have been able to submit this information due to present procedures or legislation in the area of arms exports controls or data protection legislation.