Mr. Chairman,
Cuba considers that the follow-up mechanism established by the United Nations Program of Action to prevent, combat and eradicate the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in all its aspects, based on two fundamental pillars: the Biennial Meetings and the Review Conferences, enables a comprehensive and balanced review on the progress made in the implementation of the Program of Action.
In Cuba's opinion, the follow-up mechanism to the Review Conferences on the Program of Action has worked to date and remains valid. It has guaranteed the coherence, continuity and comprehensiveness of the Program of Action, which constitutes a balanced package, and also, that States can participate on equal terms and address any aspect of the Program they consider relevant.
At the same time, with a clearly defined mandate and in response to specific needs, meetings have been held in the format of open-ended Expert Groups, to examine a specific topic, without affecting the current follow-up mechanism or its comprehensiveness. This type of meetings, under these same conditions, could continue to take place.
Mr. Chairman,
We have taken due note that in addition to the Review Conference and the Biennial Meetings, it is proposed in the summary of elements contained in the Letter from the President dated January 19, that an open-ended Expert Group meets every two years, and, that in 2019, an Open-ended Working Group holds a meeting.
In a preliminary way, we appreciate that the proposal, besides introducing modifications to the follow-up mechanism of the Review Conference, would increase the number of meetings and establish a new format for the discussions.
In this regard, in Cuba's view, it should be guaranteed that the proposal will not affect neither the comprehensive and balanced follow-up of the Program of Action nor the mandate of the Review Conferences, and that all States will be able to participate on equal terms in the new meetings proposed, to address identified topics of interest. It is of great importance to preserve the inclusiveness and transparency of the follow-up mechanism, and that this does not result in new commitments and obligations for States.
At the same time, we must continue to make the most of and work for the efficiency of the meetings of the current follow-up mechanism.
Mr. Chairman,
Regarding the national biennial reports, which are also included in the follow-up to the Conference, they should maintain their voluntary nature.
We believe that the use of standardized formats for national reports is a useful tool; at the same time, States should be given the possibility to include in their reports all the information they consider timely and convenient and to choose the format that suits their needs. The standardized format is not a rigid mechanism that prevents or hinders the States from submitting the information they deem appropriate.
Finally, we wish to highlight the need for additional efforts, either in the follow-up mechanism of the Conference or beyond, with a view to mobilizing the political will and resources to achieve a better and more effective implementation of the Program of Action and of the International Tracing Instrument.
Thank you very much