Arusha - Green Customs Initiative

shipments of Schedule 3 chemicals to non-State Parties without assurance that said chemicals
will only be used for purposes not prohibited by the Convention; and report imports and
exports of Schedule 2 and Schedule 3 chemicals by State.
Mr. Laza acknowledged that in most cases Customs is the only resource available for detailed
import/export data for compiling CWC declarations. He said that even if there are other
sources of information, Customs are frequently being used to validate information from such
sources. He further indicated that national regulations (e.g. CWC implementing legislation)
may require the issuance of import/export licences for transfer of controlled chemicals and
Customs can then confirm that such trade did or did not take place. Mr. Laza revealed that the
Technical Secretariat of the CWC is aware of instances where close cooperation between
National Authorities and Customs has enabled the resolution of discrepancies in declarations
from State Parties that are trading partners (through the extensive international Customs
network). He informed that in 2004, transfers made include 24 Schedule 2 chemicals and 15
Schedule 3 with more than 500 Schedule 2 transfers and more than 1300 Schedule 3 transfers.
He pointed out that about 1400 transfers did not match (exporting vs importing Party report)
and 844 chemicals were declared from only one State Party.
Mr. Laza mentioned said that discrepancies in the declarations of imports and exports are
resulting for various reasons including clerical mistakes (such as typing errors, incorrect unit
of measure or Incorrect information from traders and manufacturers), different calculation
methods (such as absence of national legislation, different sources of information used,
different concentration limits applied, different sites are taken into consideration, different
aggregation methods used or different weight limits applied) and Customs related difficulties
(such as use of different identification coding system – HS vs CAS, free trade areas, trade
names, shipment in transit or mixtures of chemicals). In concluding his presentation, Mr. Laza
emphasized that the resolution of these problems is a key precondition if the State Parties wish
to see the implementation of a credible verification regime with the capacity to effectively
monitor trade in scheduled chemicals under the CWC.
Plenary and Discussion
A delegate from Kenya asked whether there is a tracking system for chemical weapons and
another delegate from Uganda raised concerns as to what measures are in place when only
exporting country declares chemical weapons and there is no declaration by the importing
State Party. In response, Mr. Laza informed that practically there is no tracking of chemical
weapons but instead OPCW receives one set of declaration per year for each State Party on
the type and amount of chemicals imported and exported to other states. However, he pointed
out that OPCW intends to start publishing the discrepancies in reporting between importing
and exporting Parties and would then require the concerned Parties to consult each other and
provide to the OPCW the correct figure. Still he admitted that this approach might not be that
smooth logistically and trade secrets.
A delegate from Uganda raised concern that the controlled chemicals under CWC includes
also families of chemicals and was of view that a comprehensive list of chemical weapons be
prepared to help identify chemical weapons. Mr. Laza pointed out that there is already a
database and Handbook of chemicals which includes most of the known chemical weapons
but there are some difficulties in accessing them due to copyright reasons. However, he
stressed that it may be more useful developing relevant/practical list of chemicals that are
mostly traded rather than a comprehensive list which can prove to be tedious for Customs
38