Arusha - Green Customs Initiative

Convention, the matter will be forwarded to the Conference of the Parties to the CWC that
will forward the matter to the United Nations Security Council for guidance and follow-ups.
A delegate from Uganda wanted to know who meets the destruction cost of chemical
weapons. Mr Laza pointed out that destruction of chemical weapons is a cost intensive
undertaking in view of the fact that the cost of destructing chemical weapons is generally
higher than production cost. He further explained that the cost of destruction/disposal of
chemical weapons can be met by the same country provided it has the necessary technical and
financial capacity as is the case with most of the developed countries. However, he indicated
that even in the absence of such capacity, there are considerable opportunities to receive
assistance and many developed countries are willing to assist in this issue.
The same delegate from Uganda asked for clarification on whether it is possible using
chemical weapons for other industrial purposes. Mr. Laza informed that the Convention
prohibits use of chemical weapons for other industrial purposes with a view of avoiding
stockpiling of the chemicals weapons which might then be difficult to control. However, he
indicated that the Convention allows chemical weapons production facilities to be converted
for other purposes such pharmaceutical industries and revealed that there are such plans in
Russia.
Chemicals to be monitored by the Chemical Weapons Convention
Mr. Sandor Laza representing the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
based in Hague, the Netherlands started his presentation by defining a chemical weapon. He
said it refers to all together or separately: toxic chemicals and their precursors, except where
intended for purposes not prohibited under this Convention; munitions and devices,
specifically designed to cause death or other harm through the toxic properties of those toxic
chemicals specified in paragraph; and any equipment specifically designed for use directly in
connection with the employment of munitions and devices specified in paragraph. Mr. Laza
emphasized that the general purpose criterion is defined by purpose and not by properties.
He informed that Article VI of the CWC establishes the right of State Parties to manufacture
and use toxic chemicals and precursors for activities not prohibited under the Convention and
simultaneously creates the legal bases for the declaration, verification and transfer regimes
related to such chemicals, facilities and activities. The specifics of these regimes are set forth
in Parts VI to IX of the Verification Annex.
Mr. Laza pointed out that Article VI relates to activities not prohibited under the Convention.
Article VI is thus a consequence of the very nature of chemicals having dual-use. Toxic
chemicals can be used as chemical weapons or in the chemical industry. According to Article
II, activities not prohibited under the Convention including: industrial, agricultural, research,
medical, pharmaceutical or other peaceful purposes; protective purposes; military purposes
not related to chemical weapons and not dependent on toxic properties; and law enforcement
including riot control purposes.
He mentioned that Schedule 1 covers chemicals that are developed, produced, stockpiled or
used as a chemical weapon; or those which poses a high risk by virtue of high potential for
use in prohibited activities; and toxic chemicals and their precursors with very limited or no
commercial use, that have been developed or used as chemical weapons. It is composed of 12
entries – families or individual chemicals whereby Schedule 1A covers toxic chemical such as
33