Documents to the open-ended working group on nuclear disarmament 2016
February | May | August
Working papers
Provisional agenda
Introduced at the organisational meeting on 28 January
Indicative timetable Week 22 to 26 February 2016
Submitted by the Chair-designate
Panel I on substantively addressing concrete effective legal measures, legal provisions and norms that will need to be concluded to attain and maintain a world without nuclear weapons
Submitted by the Chair-designate
Panel II on substantively addressing recommendations on other measures that could contribute to taking forward multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations, including but not limited to:
(a) transparency measures related to the risks associated with existing nuclear weapons;
(b) measures to reduce and eliminate the risk of accidental, mistaken, unauthorized or intentional nuclear weapon detonations; and
(c) additional measures to increase awareness and understanding of the complexity of and interrelationship between the wide range of humanitarian consequences that would result from any nuclear detonation
Submitted by the Chair-designate
Letter by the Chair, 8 April 2016
Timetable for the May session, 8 April 2016
Revised indicative timetable 2 to 13 May, 28 April 2016
Chair's synthesis paper, 21 April 2016
Panel I on measures to reduce and eliminate the risk of accidental, mistaken, unauthorized or intentional nuclear weapon detonations
Submitted by the Chairperson
Panel II on transparency measure related to the risks associated with existing nuclear weapons
Submitted by the Chairperson
Panel III on additional measures to increase awareness and understanding of the complexity of and interrelationship between the wide range of humanitarian consequences that would result from any nuclear detonation
Submitted by the Chairperson
Panel IV on essential elements that could form part of effective legal measures, legal provisions and norms that will need to be concluded to attain and maintain a world without nuclear weapons
Submitted by the Chairperson
Panel V on possible pathways to take forward multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations
Submitted by the Chairperson
Panel VI on other measures that could contribute to taking forward multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations
Submitted by the Chairperson
Letter from the Chair, 7 July 2016
Letter from the Chair, 28 July 2016
Zero draft report of the Open-ended Working Group, 28 July 2016
Letter from the Chair, 15 August 2016
Revised draft report of the Open-ended Working Group, 15 August 2016
Third draft report of the Open-ended Working Group, 18 August 2016
Fourth draft report of the Open-ended Working Group, 19 August 2016
A/AC.286/WP.4
Nuclear weapons and security: A humanitarian perspective
Submitted by Austria
A/AC.286/WP.5
The "legal gap", the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and different approaches on taking forward nuclear disarmament negotiations
Submitted by Austria
A/AC.286/WP.6/Rev.1
Position paper on nuclear disarmament by the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC)
Submitted by the Dominican Republic in its capacity of President pro tempore of CELAC
A/AC.286/WP.7
Views and recommendations with regard to issues related to taking forward multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations
Submitted by the Islamic Republic of Iran
A/AC.286/WP.8
Empirical analysis of pathways for taking forward multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations
Submitted by Costa Rica and Malaysia
A/AC.286/WP.9
A progressive approach to a world free of nuclear weapons: revisiting the building· blocks paradigm
Submitted by Australia, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia and Spain
A/AC.286/WP.10
Consolidated answers to the guiding questions submitted by Panel I on substantively addressing concrete effective legal measures, legal provisions and norms that will need to be concluded to attain and maintain a world without nuclear weapons
Submitted by Brazil
A/AC.286/WP.11
Model nuclear weapons convention
Submitted by Costa Rica and Malaysia
A/AC.286/WP.12
Propuesta de acciones prácticas para lograr el desarme nuclear
Submitted by Cuba
A/AC.286/WP.13
Developing and strengthening norms for attaining and maintaining a world without nuclear weapons
Submitted by Costa Rica and Malaysia
A/AC.286/WP.14
Elements for a treaty banning nuclear weapons
Submitted by Fiji, Nauru, Palau, Samoa and Tuvalu
A/AC.286/WP.15
Proposal by the Community of Latin American and Caribbean states (CELAC) on effective legal measures to attain and maintain a world without nuclear weapons
Submitted by the Community of Latin American and Caribbean states
A/AC.286/WP.16
The existance of a legal gap
Submitted by the Netherlands
A/AC.286/WP.17
A legally-binding instrument that will need to be concluded to attain and maintain a world without nuclear weapons: a prohibition on nuclear weapons
Submitted by Mexico
A/AC.286/WP.18
De-alerting
Submitted by Chile, Malaysia, Nigeria, New Zealand, Sweden and Switzerland (the De-Alerting Group)
A/AC.286/WP.19
Measures to reduce and eliminate the risk of accidental, mistakes, unauthorized or intentional nuclear weapon detonations
Submitted by Iraq
A/AC.286/WP.20
Reflections on the “Legal Gap for the elimination and prohibition of nuclear weapons”
Submitted by Canada
A/AC.286/WP.20/Rev.1
Is there a "Legal Gap for the elimination and prohibition of nuclear weapons"?
Submitted by Canada
A.AC.286/WP.22
Effective measures towards a world free of nuclear weapons
Submitted by Japan
A/AC.286/WP.23
Issues and challenges in actual reduction and elimination of nuclear weapons
Submitted by Japan
A/AC.286/WP.24
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT): effective measures to facilitate establishing the norm against nuclear testing
Submitted by Japan and Kazakhstan
A/AC.286/WP.25
The road to zero: the progressive approach
Submitted by Belgium, Canada, Germany, Latvia and Netherlands
A/AC.286/WP.26
Security assurances
Submitted by Belgium, Canada, Germany, Netherlands and Sweden
A/AC.286/WP.27
La prohibición de las armas nucleares: preguntas relacionadas con su ámbito de aplicación y cumplimento
Submitted by Nicaragua
A/AC.286/W.34
Addressing nuclear disarmament: Recommendations from the perspective of nuclear-weapon-free zones
Submitted by Argentina, Brazil, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Guatemala, Indonesia, Malaysia, Mexico and Zambia
A/AC.286/WP.35
Nuclear Disarmament in context - a global governance issue
Submitted by Ireland
A/AC.286/WP.36*
The “Legal Gap”: Recommendations to the Open-ended Working Group on taking forward nuclear disarmament negotiations
Submitted by Afghanistan, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cabo Verde, Cambodia, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Cook Islands, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic Republic of the Cogo, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gambia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Iraq, Ireland, Islamic Republic of Iran, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kiribati, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Namibia, Nauru, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Niue, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia. Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, South Africa, Sri Lanka, State of Palestine, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Tajikistan, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor Leste, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Tuvalu, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe
A/AC.286/WP.37
Effective Measures, Legal Norms and Provisions on Nuclear Weapons: A Hybrid Approach towards nuclear disarmament
Submitted by Brazil
A/AC.286/NGO/1
Taking control: how non-nuclear-weapon States can take forward multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations
Submitted by Wildfire
A/AC.286/NGO/2
Filling the legal gap for the prohibition of nuclear weapons
Submitted by Article 36 and the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom
A/AC.286/NGO/3
A treaty banning nuclear weapons
Submitted by Article 36 and the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom
A/AC.286/NGO/4
The role of nuclear alliance states in taking forward multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations
Submitted by Wildfire
A/AC.286/NGO/5
Quest of Legal Measures with Specificity and Feasibility for Nuclear Disarmament
Submitted by Peace Depot Inc.
A/AC.286/NGO/6
Obligation and opportunity: Negotiations in good faith
Submitted by the World Council of Churches
A/AC.286/NGO/7
Building the framework for a nuclear weapon-free-world
Submitted by the Basel Peace Office
A/AC.286/NGO/8
Increasing transparency, reducing risk and raising awareness: the role of non-nuclear-weapon States
Submitted by Grupo de Práticas em Direitos Humanos e Direito Internacional
A/AC.286/NGO/9
Open letter
Submitted by Mayors for Peace
A/AC.286/NGO/10
Towards a United Nations agency that will include the mandate to educate the global public on the treaty banning nuclear weapons
Submitted by Center for Peace Education, Miriam College, Philippines
A/AC.286/NGO/11
Respond to the critical moment
Submitted by Global Security Institute
A/AC.286/NGO/12
A Legal Instrument for the Prohibition and Elimination of Nuclear Weapons
Submitted by by the International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms
A/AC.286/NGO/13
Nuclear risks
Submitted by the People for Nuclear Disarmament / Human Survival Project
A/AC.286/NGO/14
Closing our wallets to nuclear weapons: the necessity of including explicit language on financing in a nuclear weapons prohibition treaty or framework of agreements
Submitted by PAX
A/AC.286/NGO/15
Measures for States relying on, but not possessing nuclear weapons, to take forward multilateral nuclear disarmament negotiations
Submitted by PAX
A/AC.286/NGO/16
Different elements for the interoperability and nuclear ban discussion
Submitted by the Human Security Network in Latin American and the Caribbean (SEHLAC)
A/AC.286/NGO/17
Nuclear weapons and human security
Submitted by Soka Gakkai International
A/AC.286/NGO.18
The health and humanitarian case for banning and eliminating nuclear weapons
Submitted by the International Council of Nurses, the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, the World Federation of Public Health Associations
A/AC.286/NGO.19
Progress in multilateral nuclear disarmament requires a treaty prohibiting the possession, threat, or use of nuclear weapons
Submitted by Los Alamos Study Group
A/AC.286/NGO.20
Options for a framework agreement
Submitted by Middle Powers Initiative
A/AC.286/NGO.21
Nuclear disarmament summits: Building political traction for the adoption and implementation of legal measures and norms
Submitted by Middle Powers Initiative
A/AC.286/NGO.22
Security and humanitarian implications of relying on nuclear weapons for deterrence, and effective legal alternatives
Submitted by Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy
A/AC.286/NGO.23
Options for Moving Forward on Disarmament
Submitted by Arms Control Association
A/AC.286/MISC.1/Rev.1
Disarmament and Non-Proliferation Education
Submitted by the James Martin Center for Non-proliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute of International Studies
A/AC.286/MISC.2
Accelerating global nuclear disarmament: a menu of 16 policy options
Submitted by the Netherlands Institute of International Relations “Clingendael”
A/AC.286/MISC.3
Non-nuclear-weapon States and a treaty prohibiting nuclear weapons
Submitted by the Institute of International Studies, Universitas Gadjah Mada