Persistent challenges in transparency and reporting
Transparency and reporting are central to the Object and Purpose of the ATT – the Treaty requires reliable, comparable and comprehensive reporting from States Parties on their national implementation practices and arms transfers. Yet, there are persistent challenges – States often submit late or not at all, with a consistent trend toward private reporting for both annual and initial reports. This impedes the ATT community’s ability to understand state behaviour in the conventional arms trade, undermines the ability for the Treaty to undertake substantive work to improve on reporting practices, and makes it difficult to articulate the impact the ATT is having both in terms of national practices and the international trade in conventional arms.
Barriers to reporting and under-use of information
This is compounded by a misunderstanding by States on what reporting to the ATT means in practice – some are worried about risks to their national security, political sensitivities or general capacity and administrative burdens that affect their ability to submit reports. Furthermore, when combined with the lack of publicly available data, annual reports perceived value is limited in their ability to demonstrate the utility and reach of the Treaty in arms transfer practices and transfers themselves.
Using transparency as a tool for national benefit
Whilst improving transparency and reporting within the ATT can be seen as one of the “easier” aspects of the ATT strategy to address given its more quantitative nature allowing it to be easier to track and measure, there are various avenues that could be mobilised in the strategy as a way to improve practice without placing any undue burdens on States Parties. One option could be for the strategy to frame transparency as a tool for national benefit that allows States to build better national systems through effective data management and interagency coordination and levelling the playing field for arms exporters – rather than as purely an exercise in accountability.
This could be supplemented in the strategy with strengthened analysis of the reporting tools and guidance – for example, evaluating the usefulness of reporting templates and tools and cataloguing the obstacles faced by States, to ensure that existing guidance and resources are better leveraged and targeted. This could include improved feedback loops and strengthened outreach to States struggling to report, such as ensuring regional reporting workshops feed back to the formal ATT processes so that mechanisms better support informed assistance and strengthened dialogue.
Transparency and reporting are central to trust, learning and accountability under the Treaty, but constrained by capacity and uneven use of information. A strategic approach could seek to reframe reporting as a practical tool for improvement, strengthening usability and feedback whilst remaining proportionate to existing resources. Transparency in reporting could help states outside the Treaty understand more about their obligations and enhance universalisation efforts.