T/CN.7/1988/2 (Part II) Page 26
170. Commenting on the draft, several representatives expressed the view that it constituted a valid starting point for the further consideration of the article.
171.
Commenting more specifically on the draft, one representative noted some contradiction between the proposed definitions and certain substances appearing in List A and List B. He also stressed the need to re-examine more closely the relation which should be established between this article and the relevant provisions of the existing drug control conventions.
172.
The Group agreed on a number of proposed textual changes. There was also general agreement that further consideration of the revised draft article should take place at the second scheduled meeting of the Group and that in view of the highly technical nature and complexity of the provisions, it would be advisable to arrange for chemical and pharmaceutical experts, from the various delegations, to meet in the first days of the meeting in order to review the present draft and report to the Group. There was consensus to adopt such a procedure.
Second session
173.
The Group resumed its consideration of article 8 at its second session on the basis of the reformulated draft arrived at during its first session.
174. Several representatives reiterated their support for the inclusion of a set of appropriate measures for the monitoring or control of precursors and chemicals used in the illicit processing or manufacture of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances, to the extent that such precursors and chemicals were not covered by the existing drug control treaties. Divergent opinions were expressed regarding whether such provisions should be of a voluntary or mandatory nature. It was argued in this connection that consideration should be given to the specific situation of each State concerning the production and trade of such substances.
175.
Some representatives expressed the view that some of the measures of control envisaged in paragraph 8, and all of those in paragraph 9, would impose an excessive bureaucratic burden on exporting countries with no guarantee of achieving effective results. Such provisions should accordingly be deleted. Other representatives voiced preference for provisions along the lines of the monitoring systems existing in their own countries, based on co-operation between law enforcement and industry; such systems, which were of an informal nature, focussed on tracking suspicious consignments and preventing their diversion to the illicit traffic. In their opinion, Governments should be allowed maximum flexibility in adopting adequate measures to meet the prevailing circumstances in their respective countries. One representative reserved the right to make further comments on paragraphs 8 and 9 at the Commission on Narcotic Drugs.
176.
Some representatives indicated that in view of the stringent controls which countries producing narcotic raw materials were bound to exercise under the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, and which imposed on them a considerable administrative burden, it was only fair that equally strict controls should be established, whenever possible, on the precursors and chemicals originating from industrialized countries which were utilised in the illicit manufacture of narcotic drugs. Some representatives pointed out that