Version 2: 2 December 2020 SALW POA FOOD FOR THOUGHT: HOW MIGHT THE OEWG BORROW FROM/MODIFY/IMPROVE ON THE SALW POA WHEN ESTABLISHING A NEW CYBER MECHANISM 4. SAWL Rules of Procedure Each Conference and Biennial Meeting adopt their own Rules of Procedure (ROP). While there are some small differences iii, the Review Conferences and Biennial Meeting are largely identical to those of the 2001 Conference. The Cyber POA Rules of Procedure should require agreement on all substantive issues by consensus (including reports, recommendations, and declarations of the Cyber POA). The 2001 Conference Rules on decision making state: “Every effort should be made to reach agreement on substantive matters by means of consensus. There should be no voting on such matters until all efforts to achieve consensus have been exhausted” (rule 33). It then sets out rules for voting (substantive matters must pass by a two-thirds majority; procedural matters by a simple majority; the decision of procedural vs substantive is one for the President). The Reports of the Conference in 2001 and 2012 were agreed by consensus. The Conference of 2006 was not able to agree to conclude a final document. In 2018, voting was called for the inclusion or deletion of particular paragraphs in the outcome document. It then adopted its report to the General Assembly (A/Res/73/168) by consensus. 5. Legal status of the SALW POA The SALW POA comprises a voluntary, though politically binding, set of commitments. After establishment of the SALW POA, UNGA subsequently established: • SALW International Tracing Instrument: a politically (not legally) binding instrument developed within the policy framework established by the SALW POA. iv • Arms Trade Treaty: a legally binding instrument regulating international transfers of conventional weapons (including SALW). v Part Two: Substantive issues The Cyber POA could comprise a voluntary, but politically binding, set of commitments articulated in a Political Declaration (see also #6, below). Adoption of the Cyber POA would not necessitate nor prevent development of further politically or legally binding instruments on the same or related subject matter.