TNAG-1710-FCO40-2386-Royal-visits-from-the-UK-to-Hong-Kong-1987 — Page 43

E/CN. 7/1988/2 (Part II) page 28

instruments, new terms had to be used to meet the particular needs of the convention in preparation; it was essential that they be properly defined to avoid conflicting interpretations. In order to be more specific and avoid confusion, the Group agreed that the term "controlled substances", wherever it appeared in the text, would be replaced by the words "narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances" and that, in the absence of a more adequate and generally accepted designation for the "inmediate precursors and essential chemicals" covered under article 8, it would be preferable at this stage to substitute the generic term "substances in List A and List B".

183. The Group agreed to insert the word "processing" before the word "manufacture" throughout the text of article 8 to highlight the fact that, in some cases, processing refers to the preparatory stages in the illicit manufacture of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances.

184. It was agreed that paragraph 4 of the reformulated draft (new paragraph 5) should be amended to indicate, in line with the language used in the Convention on Psychotropic Substances, that the assessment of the Board "shall be determinative as to scientific matters". The Group decided to delete the last part of paragraph 4 as its provisions were made redundant by the Group's earlier decision to include criteria for the identification of substances to be brought under control. The Group also agreed to maintain unchanged paragraphs 5-7 as they appeared in the reformulated draft (new paragraphs 6-8).

185. Regarding paragraph 8 (new paragraph 9), a proposal was made to combine the provisions of subparagraphs (a) and (b) in a single subparagraph in order to eliminate the apparent contradiction between the mandatory character of subparagraph (a) and the voluntary forumulation of subpara-

graph (b).

The furnishing of information by manufacturers and traders was generally considered a key element in the co-operation to be developed in the framework of the monitoring system that Parties would have to establish and maintain. The merger of the two subparagraphs therefore appeared desirable and was approved by the Group.

It

186. As regards the question whether it would be appropriate to say that the established monitoring system "may" or "should" be conducted in close co-operation with industry, one representative expressed the view that in this instance the word "may" was more appropriate as it would enable the implementation of mandatory systems where co-operation was not efficient. was argued by several other representatives that the obligation to implement the system through co-operation should be clearly indicated by the term "shall". It was finally agreed that the measure should be mađe mandatory if it was to prove really effective and the word "shall" was correspondingly substituted.

187.

It was proposed that subparagraph 8(c) (new subparagraph 9(b)) be amended to provide not only for the seizure but also for the forfeiture of substances used in or intended for the commission of any of the offences referred to in article 2. Several representatives opposed the inclusion of forfeiture in this particular provision on the grounds that decisions to confiscate property or transfer ownership would not necessarily be within the sphere of competence of the administrative services responsible for implementing the monitoring system envisaged in article 8. It was felt that the matter of forfeiture did not belong in article 8 and should be considered in the context of the relevant legal provisions of articles 2 and 3.