Arms Trade Treaty examinedManufactured explosive weaponsAOAV: all our reportsExplosive violence research

Recommendations – Assessing the effectiveness of the Arms Trade Treaty, Part 6

For States

  • States who continue to provide arms transfers, including explosive weapons, in violation of the ATT, must end such practices and review the mechanisms which have allowed such transfers.
  • There is a need to ensure reassessment of risk assessments. Risk assessments should not be static and should always be reassessed when new relevant information arises.
  • States in a position to do so must support states in building national capacity and addressing implementation.
  • States must seek to improve transparency, including addressing all information in reports covered in the ATT, as well as further voluntary information where possible.
  • States must continue to address diversion throughout the transfer and post-shipment process, as well as mitigation efforts. Transfers should not occur where there is a reasonable risk of diversion.
  • Most importantly ATT States Parties must ensure that their actions reflect high standards of commitment in regarding their obligations under the ATT and bearing in mind the aims and objectives of the Treaty.
  • Those that are also signatory to the recent Political Declaration on the Use of Explosive Weapons in Populated Areas should consider how the aims of this Declaration can be incorporated into arms export decisions.-    The frequent use of explosive weapons in populated areas should always give rise to concern due to its Treaty implications.

Civil society

  • Civil society should continue to pursue judicial proceedings where ATT violations have occurred. This is one of the only mechanisms through which violations can be addressed and must therefore be utilised where appropriate.
  • There also remains a responsibility to highlight violations of the ATT and work cooperatively with media organisations and beyond to raise awareness of these.
  • Civil society organisations should continue to engage cooperatively with states to help achieve universalisation, better implementation and to prevent violations.
Then Foreign Secretary William Hague signs the instrument of ratification for the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) in London, 27 March 2014. Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

Read the full report here. This report was generously funded by a grant from UNSCAR: UN Trust Facility Supporting Cooperation on Arms Regulation.

Navigate the report:

Assessing the effectiveness of the Arms Trade Treaty – Executive Summary

Part 1: Nation-by-nation review analysis

Part 2: Who is causing the most harm?

Part 3: Who is providing arms?

Part 4: Thematic examination

Part 5: Conclusion

Part 6: Recommendations 

Part 7: Case studies – Myanmar’s military

Part 8: Case studies – Saudi Arabia in Yemen

Part 9: Case studies – Non-state armed groups in the Philippines

Part 10: Case studies – the Taliban

Part 11: Case studies – China before and after ATT accession

Part 12: Case studies – the United Kingdom, from key ATT architect to key violator?