E/CN.7/1988/2 (Part II) page 27
such provisions would assist importing countries, particularly those with extensive frontiers, in fighting effectively the illicit manufacture of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances within their borders.
177. There was general agreement that the control measures envisaged in the article should not be more stringent than those applying to the substances scheduled in the existing drug control treaties.
178.
Several representatives pointed out that the nature and scope of the control measures which could be accepted for inclusion in article 8 depended on what substances would eventually be placed in List A or List B. As regards the definitions proposed in the draft for "immediate precursors" in List A and "essential chemicals" in List B it was felt that in the absence of acceptable scientific definitions of those terms, they might give rise to divergent interpretations in the legal context of the convention. The qualification of substances as "immediate precursors" or "essential chemicals" would result implicitly from their inclusion in one or the other lists and this approach could be reflected in definitions of those terms, or of other appropriate terms, in article 1. It was therefore considered indispensable to establish a more systematic process with guiding criteria for the identification of substances to be placed under control and for their inclusion in the respective lists. In accordance with the suggestions made in the course of the discussion, the Division of Narcotic Drugs, in consultation with the interested experts, presented to the Group for its consideration a compromise draft of the revised lists of substances and the comprehensive process for placing the substances therein.
179. The Group endorsed the recommendation arrived at during the informal consultations to delete the definitions proposed in the earlier draft and to adopt a more legal approach, in line with the corresponding provisions of the international drug control treaties, by simply referring in the text of the article to substances in List A or in List B. The Group approved para- graphs 1-3 as amended in that sense and agreed to the inclusion, in a new paragraph 4, of a set of guiding criteria for the identification of substances that might be made subject to the international monitoring system and placed in the respective lists.
180. The Group also agreed to include in its draft, tentatively, certain substances in List A and List B.
181.
Two representatives proposed that poppy straw should be inserted in one of the Lists. Pointing out that the Reports of the International Narcotics Control Board for 1985 and 1986 had confirmed that poppy straw is susceptible to abuse and trafficking and had suggested increased control measures on this product, one representative stated that the non-inclusion of poppy straw under the same regime of control as the substances in Lists A and B cannot but erode the effectiveness of the proposed new convention. Several other representatives objected to this proposal for the reason that, if there were a need to regulate poppy straw, it would be more appropriate to do so under the Single Convention, and the appropriate approach would be to seek to amend that Convention.
182. Several representatives drew attention to the fact that while the terminology of the existing drug control treaties should be followed whenever relevant in order to ensure the necessary 'co-ordination among related