Five-Year Review: State Party New Zealand was among the first 30 ratifications that triggered the convention’s entry into force on 1 August 2010. It enacted implementing legislation for the convention in December 2009, prior to ratifying. New Zealand has participated in all of the convention’s meetings and serves as the convention’s coordinator for national implementation measures. New Zealand has condemned new use of cluster munitions, including in Libya, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, and Ukraine.

In its initial transparency report for the convention provided in 2011, New Zealand confirmed that it has never produced cluster munitions and does not possesses a stockpile, including for research or training. New Zealand has not used cluster munitions.

Policy

New Zealand signed the Convention on Cluster Munitions on 3 December 2008 and ratified on 22 December 2009. It was among the first 30 ratifications that triggered the convention’s entry into force on 1 August 2010.

New Zealand’s implementing legislation for the convention is the Cluster Munitions Prohibition Act, enacted on 17 December 2009.[1] The New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) has included instructions on compliance with the convention’s prohibitions in its law of armed conflict training.[2]

New Zealand submitted its initial Article 7 transparency report for the Convention on Cluster Munitions on 31 January 2011 and has provided annual updated reports ever since, most recently on 30 April 2015.[3]

New Zealand was an early supporter of diplomatic efforts to deal with cluster munitions and, as a member of the small Core Group of nations, took responsibility for leading the Oslo Process to its successful outcome. New Zealand hosted a key meeting of the Oslo Process in Wellington in February 2008. During the formal negotiations of the convention in Dublin in May 2008, New Zealand played a vital role in securing acceptance of the convention’s definitions.[4]

New Zealand engages proactively in the work of the Convention on Cluster Munitions. It has participated in all of the convention’s Meetings of States Parties, including the Fifth Meeting of States Parties in San José, Costa Rica in September 2014. New Zealand has attended every intersessional meeting of the convention in Geneva, most recently in June 2015.

New Zealand has served as the convention’s coordinator on national implementation measures since 2011, chairing discussions on this topic at meetings of the convention and encouraging all States Parties to consider enacting specific national legislation to enforce the convention’s provisions. On 2 December 2014, New Zealand co-hosted a workshop in Geneva to promote universalization of the convention in Africa.

New Zealand has repeatedly condemned new use of cluster munitions. As a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council since January 2015, New Zealand has raised concern over the use of cluster munitions in Yemen and sought more information on the use.[5] In June 2015, New Zealand voted for a UN Security Council resolution that expressed concern at evidence of cluster munition use in Sudan and called for the government of Sudan to “immediately investigate the use of cluster munitions.”[6]

At the convention’s intersessional meetings in June 2015, New Zealand “unreservedly” condemned any and all use of cluster munitions. It condemned the use of cluster munitions in Syria and expressed “deep concern” at reported recent use of cluster munitions in Libya, Sudan, Ukraine, and Yemen.[7] It repeated this condemnation of cluster munition use at another meeting of the convention in June 2015 and urged States Parties to employ strong language to condemn this use in draft documents prepared for the convention’s First Review Conference.[8]

At the convention’s Fifth Meeting of States Parties, New Zealand stated that it “joins others in unreservedly condemning any and all instances of the use of cluster munitions. Most regrettably, there has been evidence of the use of cluster munitions in South Sudan and, more recently, allegations of use in eastern Ukraine. Condemnation of the use of cluster munitions in Syria has been particularly noteworthy given the considerable number even of non State Parties who have done so.” It added, this response shows the convention “has already had a considerable impact on the global stigmatisation of this inhumane weapon system.”[9]

New Zealand has voted in favor of UN General Assembly (UNGA) resolutions condemning the use of cluster munition in Syria, including Resolution 69/189 on 18 December 2014, which expressed “outrage” at the continued use.[10]

New Zealand is a State Party to the Mine Ban Treaty. It is also party to the Convention on Conventional Weapons.

Interpretive issues

New Zealand’s 2009 implementation law prohibits assistance with acts banned by the convention without qualification or limitation, reflecting the nature of the Article 1 prohibition on assistance as a core and absolute obligation of the convention. In June 2011, New Zealand staetd that the act “makes clear that a member of the New Zealand Armed Forces commits an offence if he or she expressly requests the use of cluster munitions when engaged in military activities with the armed forces of a state that is not a party to the Convention and the choice of munitions used is within their exclusive control.”[11]

During the Dublin negotiations of the convention, New Zealand supported the inclusion of a new article on “interoperability” (joint military operations with states not party) and in the end stated that it viewed the resulting Article 21 as an acceptable compromise.[12] New Zealand has stated that Article 21’s positive obligations “will be implemented through mechanisms such as diplomatic representation.”[13] In August 2011, a senior NZDF official said that the “NZDF has made force commanders of combined, coalition or international forces to which members of the NZDF are contributed aware of our obligations” under the Convention on Cluster Munitions.[14]

The Cluster Munitions Prohibition Act 2009 specifically prohibits investment in cluster munition production. According to Clause 10(2), “A person commits an offense who provides or invests funds with the intention that the funds be used, or knowing that they are to be used, in the development or production of cluster munitions.” The government has not yet detailed how it will ensure compliance with the disinvestment provisions.[15]

The Cluster Munitions Prohibition Act 2009 does not explicitly include “transit” in its definition of “transfer,” but the Minister for Disarmament and Arms Control said in April 2011 that New Zealand accepts that the prohibitions on assistance and transfer that are contained in the law include the prohibition of the transit of cluster munitions across, above, or through national territory.[16] New Zealand has the same position on transit of antipersonnel mines under the Mine Ban Treaty.[17]

Use, production, transfer, and stockpiling

New Zealand has stated that it “does not possess, will not acquire and will not use cluster munitions.”[18]

New Zealand has confirmed that it has no stockpiled cluster munitions and does not possess any for research or training.[19] In 2009 the government stated, “there is no present intention to bring any cluster munitions into New Zealand.”[20]

Clause 15 of the Cluster Munitions Prohibition Act 2009 permits the use, acquisition, possession, retention, and transfer of cluster munitions for training. This requires ministerial authorization and the number of cluster munitions should be the “minimum number that is absolutely necessary for the purposes” of training.

Policy

New Zealand signed the Mine Ban Treaty on 3 December 1997 and ratified it on 27 January 1999, becoming a State Party on 1 July 1999. Legislation to enforce the antipersonnel mine prohibition domestically was enacted on 9 December 1998.[1]

New Zealand regularly attends meetings of the treaty, including the Third Review Conference in Maputo in June 2014, and more recently the Seventeenth Meeting of States Parties in Geneva in November 2018, where it provided statements on Article 5 clearance and universalization of the convention.[2] New Zealand also attended the intersessional meetings in Geneva in May 2019.

New Zealand served on the Standing Committees on the General Status and Operation of the Convention (2003–2005, 2013–2014) and Victim Assistance (2006–2008).

On 5 December 2018, New Zealand voted in favor of UN General Assembly resolution 73/61 promoting universalization and implementation of the convention, as it has done in previous years.[3]

New Zealand is party to the Convention on Conventional Weapons and its Amended Protocol II on landmines and Protocol V on explosive remnants of war. It is also party to the Convention on Cluster Munitions.

Production, transfer, stockpile destruction, and retention

New Zealand has never produced or exported antipersonnel mines but used them in limited quantities during World War II and the Korean War; operational use was prohibited in 1996. New Zealand destroyed its small stockpile of surplus training/practice mines in 1997.

New Zealand imported antipersonnel mines from the United States, and perhaps other nations.[4]

In 2021, New Zealand contributed approximately NZ$14 million (US$9.9 million) in mine action funding. This represents a 22% increase from its 2020 funding level.[1]

New Zealand reported allocating a large proportion of its contribution—NZ$11.5 million (US$8.1 million) or 82% of its total contribution in 2021—to a four-year clearance project in Lao PDR, running from 2021–2024. It contributed NZ$1 million/US$686,885 (or 7%) to United Nations Mine Action Service (UNMAS) clearance activities. The remaining US$1.1 million (or 11%) went to other unearmarked activities carried out by UNMAS.

Contributions by recipient: 2021[2]

Five-year support to mine action

From 2017–2021, New Zealand’s contribution to mine action totaled NZ$61 million (US$41.6 million). This represents a substantial increase—32% when expressed in national currency terms and 18% after conversion into United States (US) dollars—from the NZ$46.2 million (US$35.2 million) recorded during the previous five-year period, from 2012–2016.

Summary of contributions: 2017–2021[3]

Note: N/A=not applicable.