Statement by India on the ICA mechanism, delivered during the 6^th Session of the Working Group of Biological Weapons Convention

Chair,

Thank you.

I’d like to begin my commending you for steering of our work. We also appreciate the approach you have followed, thus far.

With your indulgence, I want to take the opportunity to briefly outline my delegation’s views on the ICA mechanism, which has been a matter of discussion over the last two days.

The establishment of ICA mechanism, in our view, remains central to advancing international cooperation and assistance under the Convention.

India acknowledges the document CRP.1, prepared in the last session of our WG, which was an outcome of extensive debate and thorough examination.

Although it could not be finalized then, our view is that this paper continues to provide a sound and constructive foundation for final negotiations.

Chair,

Elements of our position on the possible mandate, modalities, structure, functions and financing of the ICA mechanism, are as follows: -

STRUCTURE

1. The proposed ICA mechanism should be inclusive, and at the same time, agile.

In order to ensure inclusivity, all States Parties should ideally be able to participate in the deliberations, express views on its operation and raise any relevant concerns.

However, there is a need to avoid creating a duplicative forums. The ideal venue to hold open-ended deliberations, should be the MSP, or a distinct session, which may be named appropriately, that takes place in conjunction with or under the MSP.

2. The ICA mechanism should be nimble enough to efficiently carry out its work. The ICA Steering Group, which is proposed as a limited-ended body, should supervise the programmatic activities.

The Steering Group should be composed of individuals nominated by States.

Its membership should faithfully reflect regional or geographical distribution, which should be the primary criteria. We are also open to defining some secondary criteria.

The decisions of the Steering Group must be adopted by consensus and should be made open to review by open-ended forum through a silence procedure.

The selection of the members of the Steering Group is strictly speaking not a technical decision. It entails a discretionary power. Therefore, our view, is that the decision should ideally be taken by a political body or appointee.

FUNDING

3. It is our preference that the ICA mechanism should be firmly rooted. The basic structure and meetings of the mechanism, including that of Steering Group, should be funded by assessed contributions.

4. The ICA Fund, which will essentially fund projects, could be voluntary. However, it should be made predictable and sustainable. The voluntary contributions by States to the trust fund should be calculated based on UN assessment rates. The target amount for the ICA fund may be decided by the Review Conference.

5. While, we believe that contributions to the Trust Fund should be essentially state-driven, however we welcome contributions from other donors, UN specialized agencies, international and multilateral organisations. Those contributions could go into a unit of the fund, separate from those that come from States.

6. We also positively acknowledge that setting some minimum percentage of cost contribution by the State Party that will receive assistance could help promote sustainability and ensure national ownership. A provision, however, could be made to do away with this requirement in exceptional circumstances, particularly when an LDC conveys that it is unable to pay its necessary cost contribution.

SECRETARIAT’S/ ISU’s REMIT

7. ISU’s core focus should be on implementation of adopted decisions, and to provide administrative and secretarial support to the ICA Steering Group. It should additionally, if requested, provide guidance to States Parties to prepare project proposals for submission to Steering Group; and subsequently support monitoring of project implementation.

8. My delegation supports the strengthening of ISU with appropriate human resources to carry out envisaged tasks.

NATURE OF ASSISTANCE

9. The nature, extent and scope of assistance must be tailored according to the needs of the requesting State Party. The provision of assistance and funding should be made available on non-discriminatory basis.

10. The ICA mechanism, which must be consistent with the Convention’s mandate, should avoid duplication and seek to foster complementarity with international cooperation efforts in relevant international organizations.

11. The ICA Steering Group, with the support of ISU, should also review, on a periodic basis, the matchmaking of offers and requests in the Article X database.

LAST (MISCALLAENOUS)

12. The Review Conference should be tasked with overall oversight and review of the ICA mechanism.

Chair,

Before I end, we acknowledge new proposals on ICA under the Rolling Text. Our delegation is willing to consider these proposals, as provided in para 1 through 5.

It is our view, however, that we would all benefit from a deeper discussion into the objectives, functions and modalities of these new initiatives, and more importantly, how they would contribute to the ICA mechanism.

There is also a need to consider if and how these proposals could be subsumed within the ICA mechanism and its existing Article X database, in order to avoid creating structures or programs, which could benefit from secretarial support, mandated under the ICA mechanism.

Chair,

In conclusion, India supports the comprehensive and balanced strengthening of our Convention, of which the establishment of the ICA mechanism will form a key part.

My delegation stands ready to engage constructively in discussions, and look forward to facilitating a productive and pragmatic outcome of the Working Group.

******