Treaties for which NZ is DepositaryTrade law and free trade agreementsTreaty making processEngagement with MaoriInternational Treaties ListNational Interest AnalysesRecent Treaty ActionsTreaty CriteriaTreaty registerLaw of the Sea and FisheriesInternational Humanitarian LawInternational Courts and TribunalsPrivate International LawDiplomatic Privileges and ImmunitiesUnited Nations Security Council SanctionsInternational Law Events
Find MFAT's information paper on a country or territory. (We don't have information papers on all countries.)
Although we have tried to use plain English content on the site, you may come across specialist terms and acronyms. Find out what they mean in our glossary of terms.
If you come across a term that isn't included in the Glossary please send us an email.
1. An Instrument of Ratification of the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism (hereafter referred to as “the Convention”) would be deposited with the United Nations (the depository for the Convention) after consideration of the Convention by the House and passage by it of the necessary domestic implementing legislation. The Convention would enter into force for New Zealand 30 days after the deposit of its Instrument of Ratification or 30 days after the deposit of the 22nd Instrument of Ratification or Accession to the Treaty, whichever occurs last. At present, 35 States have signed the Convention; 2 have ratified.
2. New Zealand supports efforts to strengthen the rule of law at the international level, including through an effective network of multilateral legal instruments to combat terrorism. It is therefore appropriate that we move now to become party to this Convention, which builds upon a group of first-generation international anti‑terrorism instruments which New Zealand has already ratified. Those were more situation-specific multilateral treaties (eg. hostage-taking, hijacking) whereas this Terrorist Financing Convention is a second-generation treaty that deals principally with the forms of terrorism covered by these earlier treaties and targets the financing of terrorist acts covered by them.
3. Participation in the Convention would assist the international community as well as New Zealand in its development of the tools necessary to deter and react effectively to well-organised acts of terrorist violence. The Convention establishes a wide basis for jurisdiction for parties where a state has some link to the terrorist act or the terrorist comes into the territory of a party. Its system of wide shared jurisdiction accompanied by an obligation to prosecute or extradite makes it less easy for a person committing an international terrorist act to find a safe haven. Becoming a party to the Convention signifies New Zealand’s agreement that other states party may assume a like jurisdiction over such terrorist acts, including where New Zealanders might be involved. But the Convention also requires that persons taken into custody be guaranteed fair treatment, including all rights and guarantees provided under that state’s laws as well as pursuant to applicable provisions of international law.
4. New Zealand would be obliged to make it a punishable offence to collect or provide funds for use in an act of terrorism covered by an attached list of anti-terrorist Conventions or any other act intended to cause death or serious injury to a civilian or any other person not active in hostilities during an armed conflict in order to intimidate a population or compel a government or international organisation to do or abstain from doing something. Parties can make a reservation in respect of listed Conventions to which they are not party (of which for New Zealand there would be just one, the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material).
5. New Zealand would be required to assume jurisdiction over financing activities related to offences committed in New Zealand, by New Zealand nationals or on New Zealand vessels or aircraft. It also has the option (which it would be proposed that New Zealand should take) of establishing jurisdiction in several other situations involving a national link, including when the offence being financed is committed against one of its nationals, against one of its facilities abroad, or to compel it to do or abstain from doing something. Parties are also required, in accordance with their domestic legal principles, to take necessary measures to enable a legal entity located in its territory or registered there to be held responsible. Parties are also required to take jurisdiction to cover the situation where an offender is apprehended in its territory, including in a situation where there is no national link, since the state concerned must either extradite or prosecute. Offences cannot be regarded for purposes of extradition or mutual assistance as either political or fiscal offences.
6. The Convention would also oblige New Zealand to take appropriate measures for the identification, detection and freezing or seizure of funds used for the commission of the terrorist acts covered, as well as the forfeiture of any proceeds from their commission. The Convention would not apply to acts which are internal in all material respects to the State where they took place.
7. The Convention obliges New Zealand to take measures to prevent the financing of terrorist activities in New Zealand, including requiring financial institutions to identify the true identity of their customers and to report suspicious transactions. It also obliges New Zealand to cooperate with other states parties in exchanging information and conducting enquiries on the activities and transactions of persons suspected of financing terrorism.
8. The Convention also contains a dispute settlement mechanism that requires any dispute over the interpretation or application of the Convention that cannot be settled through negotiation to be settled through arbitration or the International Court of Justice. While parties may take a reservation against the application of this mechanism, it is proposed that New Zealand should not do so, consistent with its support for multilateral mechanisms for the settlement of disputes.
9. Being a party to this Convention, along with the strengthened legislative provisions to give effect to it, might contribute to the deterrence of the commission in New Zealand of the sorts of terrorist financing activities covered by the Convention. While parties are required to cooperate in the prevention of offences, including through various measures directed at the identification and monitoring of suspicious financial transactions, any measures additional to existing ones would be expected to complement these existing ones.
10. Becoming a party to the Convention will not have any financial, economic or revenue implications over and above the costs ordinarily associated with prosecution, mutual assistance and extradition procedures.
11. There have not been any discussions regarding future protocols to the above Conventions.
12. Domestic implementing legislation will be needed; provision has been made for this in this year’s legislative programme. Implementation is likely to require the creation of new criminal offences, the establishment of extra-territorial jurisdiction in respect of such offences, and the facility to prosecute or extradite alleged offenders apprehended in New Zealand.
13. The Ministry of Justice, Police, New Zealand Defence Force, Ministry of Defence, Security Intelligence Service, Treasury, Reserve Bank, Departments for Courts and of Corrections, Te Puni Kokiri, Customs and the Immigration Service have been consulted.
14. New Zealand may denounce this Convention by written notification to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Such denunciation would take effect one year following the receipt of the notification by the Secretary-General.
