University of Minnesota
Human Rights Program
hrp@umn.edu
612-626-7947


Human Rights Program's home page.

Home > Projects & Research > Small Arms & Light Weapons : History of Study

Small Arms & Light Weapons

History of Study

Since States are bound by human rights law, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to protect the right to life of all persons and other core rights, what do those obligations mean in terms of practical steps that a State must take to prevent violations committed with firearms? This study sought to give States guidance in their legal obligations regarding the availability, transfer and use of small arms and light weapons (SALW).

The study, requested by the United Nations Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection Human Rights, addressed such questions as:

  • In what ways are human rights affected by the availability, transfer and misuse of firearms?
  • What are the responsibilities of States to prevent human rights violations committed with firearms by private and by public actors?
  • How do the laws and practices of States regarding small arms availability, transfer and use comply with their obligations under international human rights law?
  • What further national and international standards are needed to address human rights violations that result from the use of small arms and light weapons?

The human cost of the proliferation of small arms and light weapons (SALW) has been increasingly evident in the post-Cold War era. Based on the nearly 500,000 people worldwide who are killed by SALW annually, many call SALW "the real weapons of mass destruction."

In the past decade, there has been significant diplomatic activity to strengthen international laws that curb the transfer of small arms, culminating in the July 2001 UN Conference on the "Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons." But despite these political and diplomatic activities, not enough attention has been given to the human rights implications of arms proliferation.

Frey’s study analyzed the responses of the member states of the UN to a questionnaire that asked about their policies and laws regarding the availability and use of small arms and light weapons. Based on an analysis of the states’ responses, Frey’s study began with certain assumptions:

SALW are used in many human rights violations in addition to killings. They are used to inflict injury, torture, to coerce, to enforce displacement, and to commit violations such as rape.
Vulnerable groups (refugees, children, etc.) are even more vulnerable when they are at the other end of a gun.

Many human rights violations are made worse, or can only be carried out with the additional coercion that a weapon provides.

Guns are more easily accessible now than at any time in history, and anyone anywhere who really wants one can get one, even individuals who clearly should not have one (children, the mentally ill, and others).

The report also addressed a State’s obligations regarding civilian possession of guns. Frey found that most States – with the pronounced exception of the United States—have strict laws defining who can possess guns and for what purposes. While Frey recognized that the principle of self defense has an important place in international human rights law, she concluded that it does not provide an independent, supervening right to small arms possession. Nor does self defense diminish the duty of States to regulate civilian possession."We concluded that States have a minimum obligation to have common-sense regulation of the private possession of guns," Frey says."That obligation is imposed by States’ commitments under international human rights law, and self-defense does not provide a countervailing right or a requirement that states allow people to have easy access to guns."