E/CN.7/1988/2 (Part II) page 33
Article 11
209. The Group agreed that the draft convention should contain provisions to ensure that the means of transport operated by commercial carriers were not used in the illicit traffic. Some representatives proposed that article 11 should be expanded to encompass private as well as commercial carriers in view of the importance of drug seizures linked with the international movement of privately owned and operated means of transport. In the view of one representative, it was not clear whether the scope of the article covered only ships and aircraft or included all means of transport.
210.
The Group agreed to limit paragraph 1 to a statement of the general obligation for Parties to take appropriate measures to ensure that means of transport operated by commercial carriers are not used in the illicit traffic. One representative expressed the view that the inclusion of a provision requiring Parties to increase security at international ports was not appropriate in the context of the convention.
211. On the basis of the experience gained in his country, that effective control in the area covered by article 11 could be best achieved with the co-operation and consent of commercial carriers, rather than by legislative measures, one representative proposed that the convention should positively encourage Parties to enter into special arrangements with commercial carriers and reformulated paragraph 5 to this effect. Some other representatives expressed the view that such a provision might not be applicable within all domestic legal systems. As a compromise the Group agreed to insert in paragraph 1 a revised formulation of the proposal indicating that such special arrangements could be one of the measures available to Parties in fulfilling their obligations under this article.
212.
The Group decided not to specify that searches should be "thorough" as this was implicit.
213. Several representatives indicated that it was not clear whether the searches in question were within the ambit of criminal proceedings or of control measures falling within the competence of customs authorities.
214. The level of suspicion on the basis of which searches were to be undertaken was subject to different interpretations. Several representatives were of the view that searches should be effected only when there was suspicion of a serious nature. It was also pointed out by some speakers that customs authorities undertook searches as part of their mandate, which did not require suspicion to justify such searches, and that this factor should be taken into account.
215.
Divergent views were expressed regarding the modalities and severity of sanctions which faulty commercial carriers would face. In view of the difficulty of establishing an internationally acceptable criterion regarding the precautions which commercial carriers had to take, it was pointed out that the responsibility and liability of carriers should be involved only if negligence on their part could be established, or when they had been accessories to drug trafficking. In the opinion of several representatives, the convention should leave it to the respective Parties to determine within their own national penal law, whether and when sanctions should be applied and whether these sanctions would be of an administrative or criminal nature.