01.10

Foreword

International standards for humanitarian demining programmes were first proposed by working groups at an international technical conference in Denmark, in July 1996. Criteria were prescribed for all aspects of demining standards were recommended and a new universal definition of "clearance" was agreed. In late 1996, the principles proposed in Denmark were developed by a UN-led working group and the International Standards for Humanitarian Mine Clearance Operations were developed. A first edition was issued by the UN Mine Action Service (UNMAS) in March 1997.

The scope of these original standards has since been expanded to include the other components of mine action and to reflect changes to operational procedures, practices and norms. The standards were re-developed and renamed as International Mine Action Standards (IMAS) with the first edition produced in October 2001.

The United Nations has a general responsibility for enabling and encouraging the effective management of mine action programmes, including the development and maintenance of standards. UNMAS, therefore, is the office within the United Nations responsible for the development and maintenance of IMAS. IMAS are produced with the assistance of the Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining.

The work of preparing, reviewing and revising IMAS is conducted by technical committees, with the support of international, governmental and non-governmental organizations. The latest version of each standard, together with information on the work of the technical committees www.mineactionstandards.org. Individual IMAS are reviewed at least every five years to reflect developing mine action norms and practices and to incorporate changes to international regulations and requirements.

Introduction

In recent years the international community has become increasingly aware of the scale and severity of the problem related to landmines and Explosive Remnants of War (ERW), which include unexploded sub-munitions and has come to accept that it is a global problem requiring a coordinated global response. There is also recognition that the United Nations has a key role to play in articulating this global response, and in providing the necessary international support and coordination mechanisms.

The term ‘mine action’ refers to those activities which, together, aim to reduce the social, economic and environmental impact of explosive ordnance. These activities comprise explosive ordnance risk education, survey and demining[1], victim assistance, advocacy to stigmatize the use of landmines and support of a total ban on anti-personnel landmines, and stockpile destruction. However, mine action and its constituent activities cannot be addressed in isolation as there is significant overlap with complementary humanitarian and developmental programmes, and in some cases with peacekeeping and peace support operations. Mine action requires management planning at global, national and local levels, and involves international, national, commercial, NGO and military stakeholders operating under a variety of conditions. Thus, it is not possible, nor is it desirable, to establish a unique set of criteria which alone define mine action standards and guidelines. Instead, it is necessary to identify a framework of standards and guidelines which, together, harmonize the manner in which activities and tasks are conducted by the different organizations and agencies involved. International Mine Action Standards (IMAS) provide this framework of international standards and guidelines.

---

[1] Includes technical survey, mapping, clearance, marking, post-clearance documentation, community mine action liaison and handover of cleared land. (See IMAS 04.10 for the full definition).

1. Scope

This guide defines the role of IMAS and establishes the guiding principles for their proper and appropriate use by national authorities, international organizations, donors and organizations involved with the planning and implementation of mine action activities at headquarters and field level. It also outlines the way in which IMAS are developed and maintained.

2. Normative eferences

A list of normative and informative references is given in Annex A. Normative references are important documents to which reference is made in this standard and which form part of the provisions of this standard.

3. Terms and definitions

'Policy' defines the purpose and goals of an organization, and it articulates the rules, standards and principles of action which govern the way in which the organizations aim to achieve these goals. Policy evolves in response to strategic direction and field experience. In turn, it influences the way in which plans are developed, and how resources are mobilized and applied. Policy is prescriptive and compliance is assumed, or at least is encouraged.

IMAS follow the ISO definition of a standard: “A standard is a documented agreement containing technical specifications or other precise criteria to be used consistently as rules, guidelines, or definitions of characteristics to ensure that materials, products, processes and services are fit for their purpose”.

Mine action standards aim to improve safety and efficiency in mine action by promoting the preferred procedures and practices at both headquarters and field level. To be effective, the standards should be definable, measurable, achievable and verifiable.

'Standing operating procedures' (SOPs) are instructions which define the preferred or currently established method of conducting an operational task or activity. Their purpose is to establish recognizable and measurable degrees of discipline, uniformity, consistency and commonality within an organization, with the aim of improving operational effectiveness and safety. SOPs should reflect local requirements and circumstances.

A complete glossary of all the terms, definitions and abbreviations used in the IMAS series of standards is given in IMAS 04.10.

4. Mine action

Mine action refers to '…. those activities which aim to reduce the social, economic and environmental impact of explosive ordnance (EO). Mine action is not just about clearing and releasing suspected land[1]. It is also about people and societies, and how they are affected. The objective of mine action is to reduce the risk from EO to a level where people can live safely; in which economic, social and health development can occur free from the constraints imposed by EO contamination, and in which the victims’ needs can be addressed.'[2]

The use of the term explosive ordnance in the IMAS shall be interpreted as encompassing mine action’s response to the following munitions:

• Mines
• Cluster munitions
• Unexploded ordnance
• Abandoned ordnance
• Booby traps
• Other devices (as defined by CCW APII)
• Improvised explosive devices (as stipulated below)

Improvised explosive devices (IEDs) meeting the definition of mines, booby-traps or other devices fall under the scope of mine action, when their clearance is undertaken for humanitarian purposes and in areas where active hostilities have ceased.[3]

Mine action comprises five complementary groups of activities:

1. Explosive ordnance risk education (EORE)
2. Survey, marking and clearance of EO
3. Victim assistance, including rehabilitation and reintegration
4. Stockpile destruction
5. Advocacy

A number of other enabling activities are required to support these five components of mine action, including assessment and planning, the mobilization and prioritization of resources, information management, human skills development and management training, quality management and the application of effective, appropriate and safe equipment.

---

[1] In addition to the impact on contaminated land, mine action interventions apply to survey and clearance operations within the territorial waters of a nation (generally within 12 nautical miles of shore) and inland waters; this includes coastal waters, lakes, rivers, ports, harbours, ponds and canals below the Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) mark to a water depth of 50 meters or less. (See IMAS 09.60).

[2] Mine Action and Effective Coordination: The United Nations Policy. Resolution A/53/26 on Assistance in Mine Action, adopted 17 November 1998.

[3] Resolution A/C.4/72/L.12 on Assistance in Mine Action, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly Fourth Committee on Special Political and Decolonization Committee, adopted 27 October 2017

5. Purpose of IMAS

IMAS have been developed to improve safety, efficiency and effectiveness in mine action and to promote a common and consistent approach to the conduct of mine action operations. IMAS provide guidance, establish principles and, in some cases, define international requirements and specifications⁶ . They provide a frame of reference, which encourages the sponsors and managers of mine action programmes and projects to achieve and demonstrate agreed levels of effectiveness and safety. They provide a common language, and recommend the formats and rules for handling data, which enable the accurate and timely exchange of important information.

IMAS assists national mine action authorities (NMAA) to establish national standards and national SOPs by establishing a frame of reference, which can be used, or adapted for use, as a national standard. In certain situations, and at certain times it may be necessary and appropriate for the UN, or some other body, to assume some or all of the responsibilities, and fulfil some or all of the functions, of a NMAA. In such cases, IMAS will be the de-facto national standards until such time as appropriate local modifications are put in place. IMAS also provide the basis for the development of legal contracts between donors and implementing organizations.

IMAS are not themselves SOPs. They do not define the way in which mine action requirements are to be achieved in the field - that is covered in national and local SOPs, rules, instructions and codes of practice.

IMAS also provides a suitable medium for informing the mine action community of existing international regulations, conventions, treaties and standards which impact on mine action, particularly those referring to basic human rights, clearance requirements, hazard marking and general safety issues.

6. Guiding principles

The preparation and application of IMAS are shaped by five guiding principles:

• first, the right of national governments to apply national standards to national programmes;
• second, standards should protect those most at risk;
• third, emphasis on developing the national capacity to develop, maintain and apply appropriate standards for mine action;
• fourth, to maintain consistency with other international norms and standards; and
• fifth, compliance with international conventions and treaties.

6.1 National ownership

The primary responsibility for mine action lies with the government of an affected state. This responsibility is normally vested in a NMAA which is charged with the regulation, management and coordination of a national mine action programme. The NMAA is responsible for establishing the national and local conditions, which enable the effective management of mine action. It is ultimately responsible for all phases and all facets of a mine action programme within its national boundaries, including the development of national mine action standards, in line with IMAS.

The government of an affected state is also responsible for ensuring that mine action and the NMAA are linked to the relevant humanitarian systems and national development plans and national strategies in the country. This should include the national implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. National plans should also include strategies to establish a framework to manage and address residual risk from EO contamination, which should include sustainable national capacity.

In some circumstances, including in political or territorial disputes, regional or de facto authorities may also assume some or all of the functions of a NMAA in some areas. In other situations, and for certain limited periods it may be necessary and appropriate for the United Nations, or some other recognized international body, to assume some or all of the responsibilities, and to fulfil some or all the functions, of a NMAA (see clauses 7 and 10). In such cases, reference to a 'NMAA' throughout IMAS shall be understood as applying to the United Nations or other recognized international body.

6.2 Humanitarian principles

In its response to EO, mine action is first and foremost a humanitarian concern. The framing of the standards and their application as part of any humanitarian response shall reflect the fundamental humanitarian principles of humanity, impartiality, neutrality and independence.

6.3 Capacity development

In countries with long term mine action needs, the development of an indigenous capacity should be addressed from the very outset of a mine action programme. Refers to the process through which individuals, organizations and societies obtain, strengthen and maintain the capabilities to set and achieve their own development objectives over time.[1]

 At the national level an indigenous capacity is characterized by a state's ability and willingness to develop and articulate mine action policy and direction. It is also about a state's ability to plan, coordinate, manage and sustain a mine action programme that is accountable, cost-effective and able to address the humanitarian and socio-economic implications of EO contamination, and to provide appropriate (i.e. enabling or authorizing) legislation. Such a capacity includes the willingness to promote the formation of a NMAA and other operational organizations, be they military or civilian elements, commercial companies or NGOs. It also includes the ability to develop, maintain and apply appropriate national standards for mine action.

---

[1] Taken from UNDP definition at https://www.undp.org/content/dam/aplaws/publication/en/publications/capacity-development/capacity-development-a-undp-primer/CDG_PrimerReport_final_web.pdf

6.4 Other international standards

IMAS are written to be consistent with other international standards and to comply with international regulations, conventions and treaties. Precedents norms already exist at the international level, mainly through the International Labour Organization (ILO) for safety in the workplace; the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) provides guidance on risk management (ISO Guide 51) and the application of quality systems (ISO 9001:2000); and numerous international standards, protocols and norms which prescribe rules for the handling, exchange and display of electronic data that has application to the management of mine action information. IMAS are also consistent with UN and other international gender and diversity guidelines and ensure the different needs of the women, men, boys and girls in affected communities. IMAS have also been reviewed and amended, where appropriate, to allow for compliance during mine action activities and operations with the 2011 International Ammunition Technical Guidelines (IATG).

6.5 International treaties

IMAS draws on the three main treaties in international law which deal with landmines and ERW:

1. The Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention (APMBC) on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction (often referred to as the Ottawa Convention or Mine Ban Treaty);
2. The Conventional on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) Amended Protocol II on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices, and Protocol V on Explosive Remnants of War; and
3. The Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM) 2008 – a convention that prohibits all use, stockpiling, production and transfer of Cluster Munitions. Separate articles in the convention concern assistance to victims, clearance of contaminated area and destruction of stockpiles.

Countries which are States Party to one or more of the Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention (APMBC), the Amended Protocol II of CCW, Protocol V of CCW and the CCM have, for instance, certain specific obligations regarding the marking and clearance of explosive hazards. The provisions of IMAS do not, however, replace the obligations detailed in these conventions.

7. International Organization for Standardization (ISO)

ISO is a worldwide federation of national bodies from over 138 countries. Its work results in international agreements which are published as ISO standards and guides. ISO is an NGO and the standards it develops are voluntary, although some (mainly those concerned with health, safety and environmental aspects) have been adopted by many countries as part of their regulatory framework. ISO deals with the full spectrum of human activities and many of the tasks and processes which contribute to mine action have a relevant standard. A list of ISO standards and guides is given in the ISO Catalogue; see www.iso.org/standards-catalogue/browse-by-ics.html

ISO has an international reputation for integrity and neutrality, and it enjoys a special working relationship with international organizations including the United Nations, and with regional organizations including the European Union. IMAS have been developed to be compatible with ISO standards and guides. Adopting the ISO format and language provides some significant advantages including consistency of layout, use of internationally recognized terminology, and a greater acceptance by international, national and regional organizations who are accustomed to the ISO series of standards and guides. It should also provide the opportunity for IMAS to be accepted and adopted in due course as mature ISO standards.

8. Contextual guidance for the application of IMAS

These standards have been developed to assist national authorities in the development of national mine action standards. They represent international good practice and provide a guiding framework for circumstances where national mine action standards are incomplete or not yet in place. They have no legal standing except where they have been adopted by a national authority as national standards, or where one or more of the specific IMAS is specified in a contract or some other legal instrument (such as a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) or a Letter of Agreement). There should be absolute agreement on the need to adopt appropriate standards and professional codes of conduct, particularly for issues of safety and occupational health. The application of the IMAS will vary between different contexts and circumstances. This section offers guidance based on three broad contexts.

8.1 Humanitarian response

There is a requirement for mine action in the immediate aftermath of armed conflict involving the use of EO. Contamination usually poses an immediate risk to civilians, particularly refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) as well as individuals and organizations responsible for the delivery of humanitarian assistance. There is therefore a need for a coordinated international response.

In these circumstances, mine action activities will normally prioritize activities to prevent civilian accidents from EO. This stage will therefore involve risk education to communities and groups at risk, including members of the humanitarian community, rapid survey and data gathering regarding contamination and casualties, and clearance of EO posing an immediate risk to civilians and humanitarian assistance. Every effort should be made to coordinate and prioritize mine action activities with the broader humanitarian response by national authorities and the humanitarian community, and to incorporate conflict and gender sensitivity in all activities and operations.

Depending on the context, there may or may not be a NMAA and there may be limited or no centralized direction or coordination. In such circumstances, mine action organizations should draw on IMAS as far as possible, applying professional judgement. Particular emphasis should be given to the application of standards covering safety and occupational health, information on the location and impact of EO contamination and casualties and information management.

Mine action organizations should share technical details of contamination systematically within the mine action community to ensure that the development and application of national standards and approaches are relevant, responsive and commensurate to the contamination and context. To enable an effective response, stakeholders shall make every effort to ensure that data on the location of contamination and operational activities are recorded accurately and consistently, and with the necessary level of data disaggregation.

8.2 Immediate post-conflict clearance

Humanitarian response, based on immediate humanitarian priorities, will normally be followed by a move to more systematic clearance of EO. Given the nature of many conflicts, this may take place alongside humanitarian operations conducted in other areas. There should be a growing emphasis on consistent and systematic operational implementation, quality assurance and information management. Prioritization should also become more consistent and systematic, and ensure the full participation of women, girls, boys and men, and recognize and address their differing needs.

A NMAA or interim mine action centre administered by the United Nations, or another body may need to be established or reinforced, depending on the circumstances and needs of an affected state. Mine action stakeholders shall make every effort to support the establishment of a recognized NMAA as soon as possible. This is likely to involve international cooperation and assistance from the international community, including:

• The provision of appropriate equipment, training, quality assurance and post-clearance quality control.
• The application of an accreditation system for mine action organizations.
• The introduction or updating of management information systems such as the Information Management System for Mine Action (IMSMA).
• Ensuring the development or updating of an appropriate NMAS which draws on the framework of the IMAS.

International cooperation and assistance may be sought from and provided by States, international and regional organizations, the United Nations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) or commercial companies/contractors.

8.3 Systematic survey, clearance and mine action

Depending on the scale of contamination from EO, there can be a requirement for long-term national mine action programmes. Clearance and other assistance in mine action, including assistance to victims, survivors and their communities, remains the responsibility of the affected state, coordinated by a designated NMAA. The coordination and oversight of mine action will normally be wholly nationally owned and overseen by the NMAA.

The NMAA should be responsible for ensuring clear and measurable mine action plans that include national budget contributions. They should involve the full participation of women, girls, boys and men, particularly from communities affected by EO, and should be prioritized based on need. National plans should complement national development strategies, including the national implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and include strategies that enable the sustainable national management of residual risk from EO.

NMAS should be comprehensive and reflect the full body of international good practice that is reflected in the IMAS. International cooperation and assistance may continue to be sought, offered and provided by States, international and regional organizations, the United Nations, or commercial companies/contractors.

9. Quality and risk management

IMAS have been developed in line with the recommendations and processes contained within the ISO Quality Management systems (ISO 9001:2008) and the ISO Risk Management system (ISO Guide 51). Elements of these systems are contained within the majority of IMAS, thereby making the IMAS themselves an integrated risk and quality management system. There is still a requirement, however, for NMAA and mine action organizations to develop their own specific individual risk and quality management systems.

The concept and requirements of land release are discussed in IMAS 07.10 and 07.11. The process of releasing land through non-technical survey and, or technical survey is explained in IMAS 08.10 and 08.20 respectively. Information on quality management is addressed in IMAS 07.12 and risk management is discussed in IMAS 07.14.

10. Conformance

In IMAS, the words 'shall', 'should' and 'may' are used to convey the intended degree of compliance. This use is consistent with the language used in ISO standards and guides. 'Shall' is used to indicate requirements, methods or specifications that are to be applied in order to conform to the standard. It is used sparingly in the IMAS standards. 'Should' is used to indicate the preferred requirements, methods or specifications. 'May' is used to indicate a permitted method or course of action.

11. Legal requirements

IMAS have no legal standing except where they have been adopted by a national authority as national standards, or where one or more of the specific IMAS is specified in a contract or some other legal instrument, (such as a MOU or a Letter of Agreement). The wording of each contract or agreement should clarify the application of IMAS standards to each proposed project and should reflect the national and local circumstances discussed in clause 7 above; i.e. the local security situation, the authority of government, political will and the resources available. Contracts should be consistent with the laws of the mine-affected state. This may cover general issues such as safety and occupational health, environmental requirements, equal opportunities for men and women and minimum wage, in addition to legislation specifically relating to the conduct of mine action. Guidance on the preparation and framing of contracts is given in IMAS 07.20.

12. Continual review of IMAS

12.1 IMAS review

ISO undertakes a formal review of all of its standards on a three to five-year basis. This is to ensure that the standards are still relevant, accurate, achievable and appropriate. IMAS, Technical Notes for Mine Action (TNMA) and Test and Evaluation Protocols (T&EPs), hereinafter referred to as IMAS document, are formally reviewed on a five-year basis. This does not preclude essential amendments or withdrawals being made within that period for reasons of operational safety or efficiency. To initiate a substantial amendment to an IMAS document, the development of a new IMAS document, or the recommendation to withdraw and existing IMAS document, the justification template in Annex C7 should be completed and submitted to the RB. A minimum of 25% of the IMAS RB’s members are required to support the proposal before the issue will be taken further[1].

The periodic review process allows for timely updates, while the potential for withdrawal ensures that mine action standards continuously evolve to address emerging challenges and remain aligned with the latest advancements in the field

Annex D details the approval stages for the amendment, development and withdrawal of IMAS documents.

Annex E details the requirements for the storage and publication of IMAS documents.

---

[1] The Review Board may decide to recommend to the Steering Group that the issue is included in the annual IMAS workplan.

12.2 Inter-Agency Coordination Group on Mine Action

The Inter-Agency Coordination Group on Mine Action (IACG-MA) should meet annually at the Principal’s level (Under-Secretary General and Directors) to consider the findings and recommendations of the IMAS Steering Group. The Inter-Agency Coordination Group on Mine Action will then either:

• endorse the findings and recommendations of the IMAS Steering Group; or
• return IMAS that they have concerns about to the IMAS Steering Group for further work and reconsideration.

12.3 IMAS Steering Group

The IMAS Steering Group (SG) provides executive direction to the IMAS RB. It provides strategic direction and policy guidance when reviewing and approving the IMAS RB workplan; ensuring that rules of procedure are followed; and that the composition of the RB remains appropriate and representative. The IMAS SG consists of the following members:

a) Chair:
UNMAS and Member

b) Members:   
1 x Donor representative (rotational)
1 x GICHD Representative (permanent)
1 x National Mine Action Authority Representative (rotational)
1 x UNDP Representative (permanent)
1 x UNICEF Representative (permanent)
1 x UNOPS Representative (permanent)

c) Secretary:   
GICHD

Terms of Reference and Rules of Procedure for the IMAS SG are found in Annex B and associated Appendixes.

12.4 IMAS Review Board

A Review Board (RB) has been constituted to provide technical input to the IMAS framework. The IMAS RB should consist of the following members:

a) Chair:
UNMAS

b) Members:
2 x Commercial company/contractor representative
2 x Donor representative
1 x GICHD Representative (permanent)
2 x Humanitarian Demining School representative
1 x Implementation Support Unit representative
7 x INGO/mine action organization representative
1 x Military representative (engaged in UN-peacekeeping)
5 x National programme representative
2 x NNGO/Regional mine action organization representative
2 x Non-affiliated/Independent representative
1 x UNDP representative (permanent)
1 x UNICEF representative (permanent)
1 x UNMAS representative (permanent)
1 x UNOPS representative (permanent)

c) Secretary:
GICHD

Terms of reference and rules of procedure for the IMAS Review Board are found in Annex B and associated appendices.

12.5 IMAS technical working groups

IMAS technical working groups (TWG) may be formed for a limited duration, mandated by the IMAS RB, to develop, revise or recommend the withdrawal of IMAS documents as part of the IMAS RB workplan.

Terms of Reference and Rules of Procedure for the TWG are found in Annex B.

13. Responsibilities

13.1 United Nations

The United Nations has a general responsibility for enabling and encouraging the effective management of mine action programmes by continuously refining IMAS to reflect developing mine action norms and practices and to incorporate changes to international regulations and requirements. UNMAS is the office within the United Nations Secretariat responsible to the international community for the development and maintenance of IMAS, including this guide.

The United Nations applies IMAS to its mine action programmes, activities and contracts unless the local situation precludes their effective application. In such circumstances, when one or more IMAS is not appropriate, the UN provides alternative, specifications, requirements and guidance.

13.2 Regional organizations

In certain areas of the world, regional organizations have been given a mandate by their member states to coordinate and support mine action programmes within a states’ national boundaries. (A particular example of this is the OAS mine action programme in Central and South America).

In these circumstances, the regional organizations will assume many of the responsibilities and roles of the NMAA and may also act as a conduit for donor resources. The responsibilities and roles of regional organizations for mine action will vary from state to state and are subject to a specific MOU, or similar agreement.

13.3 National mine action authority (NMAA)

The NMAA is responsible for ensuring the conditions which enable the effective management of national mine action projects. The NMAA is ultimately responsible for developing and managing the mine action programme within its national boundaries.

The NMAA is responsible for establishing and maintaining national standards, regulations and procedures for the management of mine action operations. These national standards, regulations and procedures should be consistent with IMAS, and other relevant national and international standards, regulations and requirements.

In certain situations, and at certain times, it may be necessary and appropriate for the UN, or some other body, to assume some or all of the responsibilities, and fulfil some or all the functions, of a NMAA.

13.4 Mine action centre (MAC)

A MAC can be established by either the NMAA or in specific circumstances by the United Nations. The structure of each MAC will reflect the national mine action plan, but in general they will be responsible for:

1. the coordination or planning of all mine action activities in their area of responsibility;
2. the provision of technical advice to the NMAA;
3. the maintenance of mine action records and databases;
4. (if delegated by the NMAA), the accreditation of mine action organizations; and
5. the investigation of mine action related accidents and incidents.

13.5 Mine action organizations

NGOs, commercial companies and other organizations involved in mine action shall establish SOPs, instructions and drills which enable mine action projects to be conducted effectively, efficiently and safely. These SOPs should be based on the national standards in the country of operation; (they may be based on IMAS if national standards do not yet exist). Where the NMAA is in the process of formation, such organizations are well placed to assist the formation process, by giving advice and assistance including the framing of national standards.

13.6 Donors

Most mine action is funded by donors – mainly governments, regional organizations and international trust funds. Donor agencies are part of the management process, and as such have a responsibility for ensuring that the projects that they are funding are managed effectively, and in accordance with national and/or international standards. This involves attention to the writing of contract documents and ensuring that mine action organizations chosen to carry out such contracts are competent and likely to meet the national accreditation criteria. Donors, or their agents, are also partly responsible for ensuring that the standards and guidelines for quality management are applied, including monitoring and the post-clearance inspection of cleared land. This responsibility and accountability is even greater when the NMAA is in the process of formation and has not had the opportunity to gain experience.

Annex A (Normative and informative) References

The following normative documents contain provisions, which, through reference in this text, constitute provisions of this part of the standard. For dated references, subsequent amendments to, or revisions of, any of these publications do not apply. However, parties to agreements based on this part of the standard are encouraged to investigate the possibility of applying the most recent editions of the normative documents indicated below. For undated references, the latest edition of the normative document referred to applies. Members of ISO and IEC maintain registers of currently valid ISO or EN:

1. IMAS 04.10 Glossary of mine action terms, definitions and abbreviations;
2. IMAS 07.10 Guidelines and requirements for the management of land release and residual contamination operations;
3. IMAS 07.11 Land Release;
4. IMAS 07.12 Quality Management in Mine Action;
5. IMAS 07.14 Risk Management in Mine Action;
6. IMAS 07.20 Guide for the development and management of mine action contracts;
7. IMAS 08.10 Non-Technical Survey; and
8. IMAS 08.20 Technical Survey
9. IMAS 08.20 Technical Survey
10. IMAS 09.60 Underwater survey and clearance of explosive ordnance

Other informative references:

1. ISO Guide 51, Safety aspects - Guidelines for their inclusion in standards;
2. ILO R164 - Occupational safety and health recommendation 1981;
3. ILO C155 - Occupational safety and health convention 1981;
4. International Ammunition Technical Guidelines 2011;
5. Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction (APMBC);
6. Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW), amended protocol II and protocol V;
7. Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM);
8. Mine action and effective coordination: the United Nations Inter-Agency Policy; and
9. UNMAS Gender Guidelines for Mine Action Programmes.

Annex B IMAS (normative) IMAS management structure

B1. General

The highest level of endorsement of IMAS is at the Inter-Agency Coordination Group on Mine Action (IACG-MA) (at the Principal’s level). Endorsement of IMAS at this level is noted in the report of the Secretary-General on Assistance in mine action, it also authorizes IMAS to be published on the IMAS website as current documents.

The IMAS Steering Group (SG) provides executive direction to the IMAS Review Board (RB). The SG does not comment on technical input or changes to IMAS, but it provides strategic direction and policy guidance when reviewing and approving the IMAS workplan; ensures that rules of procedure are followed; and that membership of the RB remains appropriate and representative.

The RB consists of individuals representing a broad collection of organizations/groups, donors and specialties, who themselves represent a broad cross-section of the humanitarian mine action community. The RB identifies qualified organizations and non-affiliated individuals for membership.

B2. IMAS Steering Group

B.2.1. General Conditions

The IMAS SG provides executive guidance and oversight of all work undertaken by the RB and associated IMAS technical working groups (TWGs). 

The SG is charged with ensuring that the IMAS framework remains fit for purpose, it is responsible for providing strategic direction and policy guidance to ensure the ongoing coherence and utility of IMAS in line with the evolving needs of the sector, as the global context changes. The principal tool that the SG uses to achieve this is through its consideration and approval of the IMAS workplan. 

Whilst the SG does not concern itself with the technical detail contained in IMAS, it does fulfil an important quality management function and is responsible for ensuring that new or amended IMAS guidance is developed in line with the approved workplan and in accordance with the rules of procedure set out in IMAS 01.10.

The SG has the mandate to ensure that the RB membership remains appropriate and representative, is consistent with the provisions laid out in IMAS 01.10 and that the members rotate in line with the proper rules of procedure. The SG does not determine the rotation of RB members directly, but periodically reviews the composition of the RB and provides directions to the chair of the RB in the event that a rotation of members is required. 

B.2.2. Chair and Secretary

UNMAS is mandated to develop and maintain standards for mine action. As such, the position of chair of the SG is held by the director of UNMAS. The chair of the SG is a permanent member with full membership/voting rights.

The secretary of the SG is provided by GICHD and reports to the chair on all SG matters. The secretary of the SG is not a voting member of the SG.

B.2.3. Members

The SG is a Director-level body composed of members representing UNMAS (chair), UNDP, UNOPS, UNICEF, the GICHD, a National Mine Action Authority (NMAA) and a mine action donor.

The UN entities and the GICHD are permanent members of the SG. The UN entities appoint a director to represent their respective organizations. The GICHD seat is held by the incumbent director of the organization. 

The SG invites NMAA and Donor representatives to serve as members of the SG on a rotational basis for a period of two years. These representatives are nominated based on consultations among other actors within their given membership category. NMAA are invited to elect their representative during meetings of National Mine Action Directors and UN Advisers, or other appropriate fora, in years when the member is required to rotate, or if a member resigns. The Mine Action Support Group (MASG) has agreed to nominate its chair as SG representative. This appointment will be reviewed every two years or upon the change-over of the chair of the MASG.

It is not possible for an organization to nominate the same person to represent it on both the SG and RB at the same time. 

B.2.4. Steering Group Rules of Procedure

B.2.4.1. Regular Steering Group Meetings

A minimum of one (1) regular SG meeting shall be held per year, to be held before the first annual meeting of the IACG-MA.

B.2.4.2. Special Steering Group Meetings

Special meetings of the SG may be held subject to the following conditions: 

1. Following a request from a minimum of two members, supported by a statement as to the purpose of the special meeting;
2. Following a request from the RB, with support from the chair of the SG and supported by a statement as to the purpose of the special meeting; or 
3. At the direction of the IACG-MA Principals. 

B.2.4.3. Preparation

Either the chair of the SG, or the secretary on his/her behalf, shall circulate a proposed date/time, place and preliminary agenda for a SG meeting (preferably) a minimum of thirty (30) days before the meeting is to be held. 

Members of the SG have the right to propose an alternative date/time as long as the thirty (30) day notice period is respected. 

Once a date is agreed upon, any proposed additions to the agenda may be submitted no later than fifteen days (15) before the meeting is to take place. The final agenda may include any matter suggested by any member. 

Members will receive copies of the final agenda, RB minutes, an overview of existing TWG, attendance records, a one-page summary of each IMAS being put forward, and any other relevant documents a minimum of ten (10) days before an SG meeting takes place.

B.2.4.4. Attendance

SG meetings are closed sessions that can be attended either in person or remotely. If a permanent SG member is unable to attend a meeting either in person or remotely, they may appoint a substitute to represent their organization. Proxy members shall not be serving members of the RB.

SG members have the right to bring one (1) additional person from within their organizations to attend an SG meeting to support them. These may include the respective organization’s member of the RB. Notification should be made in writing to the chair/secretary a minimum of fifteen (15) days prior to the meeting in question. 

The chair of the RB may be invited to attend all or part of a SG meeting in order to answer questions relating to the development of individual IMAS being put forward for adoption. Others may attend at the invitation of the chair of the SG.

B.2.4.5. Conduct of business

SG meetings are conducted in English. The chair of the SG shall open and close the SG meeting, direct the discussion, ensure observance of the rules of procedure, accord the right to speak, put questions and announce decisions. He or she shall rule on points of order, subject to the rules of procedure, and shall have control of the proceedings and over the maintenance of order at any SG meeting. 

During the discussion of any matter, any member or the secretary may at any time raise a point of order, and this shall be immediately decided by the chair of the SG. Any member may appeal against the ruling and the appeal shall be immediately put to a vote. The ruling on the point of order shall stand unless overruled by a simple majority of votes cast by members present.

B.2.4.6. Role of the chair

The chair of the SG is responsible for conducting SG meetings in accordance with the rules of procedure outlined herein. The position is filled by the director of the UN Mine Action Service and reports to the IACG-MA. Terms of Reference for the chair of the SG are found in Appendix 1 to this Annex. 

B.2.4.7. Role of the secretary

The secretary of the SG is responsible for the coordination of all SG planning and the organization of meetings in cooperation with the chair of the SG, production and archiving of supporting documentation, records of meetings and decisions, and circulation of information. The secretary is provided by the Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining and reports to the chair of the SG. Terms of Reference for the secretary of the SG are found in Appendix 1 to this Annex.

B.2.4.8. Role of the members

Members of the SG are responsible for providing strategic direction and policy guidance when reviewing and approving the annual RB workplan; ensuring that all new and revised IMAS have been developed in accordance with the rules of procedure outlined in IMAS 01.10; and that composition of the RB remains appropriate, representative and is consistent with the provisions laid out in IMAS 01.10. Permanent members represent their respective organizations whereas rotating members should seek to represent the global views of their membership category. Terms of Reference for members of the SG are found in Appendix 1 to this Annex. 

B.2.4.9. Records of meeting

The Secretary shall circulate the minutes of each SG meeting within fifteen (15) days. The minutes will include:

1. A record of attendance;
2. A summary of main discussion points;
3. A record of decisions taken; and
4. A list of follow-up actions including responsibilities and approximate timelines.

B.2.4.10. Decision-making principles

Decision-making procedures within the SG will reflect the principle that consensus should be achieved wherever possible. The chair of the SG will therefore strive to reach this consensus through discussion and by encouraging the participation of all members. 

In situations where consensus is not possible, members may call for a vote in order to force a decision on a given point of importance, and where a delay in decision-making would have negative consequences for the work of the RB and the sector.

B.2.4.11. Voting Rules

A vote may be called by any member by requesting the chair to move to a vote. This request must be seconded by another member before the vote can proceed. The chair of the SG will repeat the issue to be voted on immediately before the vote so that it is clear to all members what the details of the issue are. This language will be precisely recorded in the minutes for later reference.

A vote on any decision shall require at least a two-thirds majority to pass (five of the total seven members of the SG if all in attendance). Included within this majority, must be a positive vote by at least three of the five permanent members of the SG. The quorum for the SG shall be (5) members attending, with a minimum representation of four (4) permanent members. Proxy members attending a given SG meeting will retain the voting rights of the member they represent.

A vote on a point of order shall require a simple majority of members present (see section B.2.4.5).

The request for a vote should be recorded in the minutes of the meeting, along with which members called for the vote and seconded it. The final decision should also be recorded in the minutes, including how many votes were positive and negative. 

B.2.4.12. Decisions made remotely

In certain circumstances and in order to facilitate the formal adoption of new IMAS by the IACG-MA the SG may take decisions remotely. This may be the case under the following circumstances: 

1. A decision was not reached during an SG meeting;
2. Discussion over a specific agenda point at an SG meeting led to a request for further information from one or more members; 
3. A decision taken during a meeting was made dependent on the provision of further evidence by the RB; and/or
4. The SG is not convened or is unable to meet for a period of more than twelve (12) months.

In the case where a remote procedure is invoked, the chair of the SG, or the secretary on behalf of the chair, will circulate an email to members. The content of this message should review the circumstances surrounding the point to be addressed remotely (including background on the issue), a summary of discussions to date, and any relevant references to minutes or other records of discussion (these should be attached to the message for easy reference of the members). The issue to be decided should also be clearly and succinctly summarized in the email, including the deadline for submitting a vote. Members should be reminded that a silence procedure (see below) will prevail should they not cast their vote before the indicated deadline.

Silence Procedure

In order to avoid blockages in decision-making, all remote decision-making will be subject to a silence procedure. Members will have a two-week window to cast their vote on an issue remotely. After this time has elapsed, the vote will be recorded as a positive vote. In exceptional circumstances, members may request an additional two-week period for responding. This additional time may be granted at the discretion of the chair of the SG.

B3. IMAS Review Board

B.3.1. General conditions

The RB is the highest level at which technical input is provided to the IMAS framework. New or amended IMAS documents are approved by the RB and submitted to the SG for review before endorsement by the principles of the IACG-MA.

The RB is charged with ensuring that IMAS remain fit for purpose by providing technical input consistent with the evolving needs of the mine action sector. The RB also mandates RB members or technical working groups (TWG) to develop or revise IMAS, Technical Notes for Mine Action (TNMAs) and Test and Evaluation Protocols (T&EPs).

B.3.2. Chair and secretary

UNMAS is mandated by the General Assembly to develop and maintain standards for mine action. The chair of the RB is nominated by the director of UNMAS and is provided by UNMAS. The chair of the RB is not a voting member of the RB.

The secretary of the RB is provided by GICHD and reports to the chair on all RB matters. The secretary of the RB is not a voting member of the RB.

B.3.3. Membership

B.3.3.1. Functional groups

To ensure a wide representation of the mine action sector, membership slots are allocated to mine action organizations, within functional groups. These functional groups are: 1) commercial companies/contractors; 2) donors; 3) humanitarian demining schools; 4) an implementation support unit; 5) INGOs/ mine action organizations; 6) military (engaged in UN-peacekeeping); 7) national programmes; 8) NNGOs/regional mine action organizations[1]; 9) non-affiliated/independents. Each of the functional groups is allocated a maximum number of membership slots (see section 12.4 of IMAS 01.10).

The members GICHD, UNDP, UNICEF, UNMAS, and UNOPS, are considered permanent members and are represented as individual entities, and do not form part of a function group.

[1] Includes National NGOs, national commercial companies and contractors, and regional mine action organizations

B.3.3.2. Members

RB membership slots are allocated to mine action organizations within the functional groups above and are to be filled by individuals who work for those organizations and who meet the required qualifications (see B.3.3.5).

Non-affiliated memberships are allocated, by the RB, to individuals. Non-affiliated members shall not be employed by any other RB member entity or organizations.

Members of the RB will act in the best interest for the mine action sector as a whole, without allowing personal or organizational self-interest to take precedence. The RB member should put forth the viewpoint of the organization they represent. The member might in certain situations be asked to voice the viewpoint of the functional group in which they sit.

The maximum number of members on the RB, if it is to remain effective and manageable, should be limited to around thirty (30) members.

Proposals for changes to the functional groups of the RB shall be submitted to the SG for endorsement.

B.3.3.3 Member selection process

When a member slot becomes vacant, the RB chair, through the RB secretary, will notify organizations within the relevant functional group of the opportunity to join the RB. Organizations that wish to serve as a member or as an observer (see B.3.3.7.) of the RB shall submit an expression of interest by email to the RB chair via the Secretary. The secretary will maintain a record of interested organizations and the chair will present interested organizations to the RB for consideration. If consensus is not reached on the selection of an RB member organizations, the issue will be resolved through a vote (see B.3.5.12.).

B.3.3.4. Member representative selection process

Nominations for representatives of RB member organizations should be sent in writing to the chair of the RB, through the secretary.

Organizations should ensure that nominated representatives meet the required representative qualifications (see B.3.3.5).

Non-affiliated members can be appointed by the RB if the potential member’s profile is applicable and beneficial to the RB.

Provision should be given to the promotion of gender and geographical diversity when nominating new member representatives. When replacing their representative, organizations should nominate a female candidate if they are replacing a male representative and should nominate a male candidate if replacing a female representative. Should a member organization not be in a position to do so, the nomination request should include a justification for this. Organizations should also consider rotating representatives with different geographic backgrounds when changing their representative.

Members of the RB, or the RB chair, can request a vote to terminate a member's representation. Requests should be submitted to the chair of the RB, through the secretary, by email or at RB meetings. Termination of membership, if not voluntary, will be put to all members of the RB by email and agreed upon by a general vote (see B.3.5.12).

B.3.3.5 Representative qalifications

Nominees for the RB should fit the following profile:

1. Works for an organization within one of the functional groups listed in clause 12.4 (IMAS 01.10);
2. Has worked for at least seven years on mine action issues in one, or preferably more than one of the five pillars of mine action;
3. Has experience in the field and the practical application of IMAS;
4. Is capable of providing high quality, substantive commentary on draft, new, or amended IMAS in English within two weeks of receipt; and
5. Is a good team player and communicator, especially in electronic media, capable of providing constructive comments and innovative solutions to problems.

B.3.3.6. Non-affiliated members

To ensure a wide representation of the mine action community the RB will also contain members whose views are not affiliated with any organization. Whilst they may have worked for a mine action organization that is an RB member, they cannot work for an organization already represented on the RB. Non-affiliated members should have wide experience that is considered of benefit to the IMAS process in general and the RB in particular.

B.3.3.7 Observers

Observer status is available and, while comments are welcomed from observers, they will not be asked or able to vote. The selection of new observer appointments will be put to the RB for a General Vote. Organizations shall not have an observer on the RB if they are also a member of the RB. Organizations shall only have one observer on the RB.

B.3.3.8. Tenure of membership of member organizations

There is no time limit to an organization’s membership of the RB.

Member organizations are subject to a periodic membership revalidation.

Revalidation shall occur one year after an organization has joined the RB; and reoccur once every subsequent five years.

This process will be initiated by the RB secretary no less than three months before the revalidation process is due to take place.

To revalidate their membership, member organizations shall confirm in writing to the RB secretary that they are willing and able to continue to undertake the responsibilities of RB members, as set out in the TORs for members of the Review Board (See section 3 of appendix 2 to Annex B, IMAS 01.10).

In doing so, members should consider:

• Their past participation by the organizational representative(s) to the RB or other person(s) from the organization in meetings and TWGs.
• How they see their role in the RB and how they can contribute to RB fora and discussions.

Should an RB member not wish to revalidate their membership, their membership will discontinue, and a membership slot will become available within the relevant functional group.

The RB may consider allocating observer status to an organization whose membership has ended.

Revalidation of membership does not apply to permanent membership i.e., UNDP, UNOPS, UNICEF, UNMAS, and GICHD.

B.3.3.9. Tenure of member representatives and non-affiliated Individuals

The standard tenure of individual member representatives and non-affiliated members is five (5) years. The RB may extend the tenure for any reason for up to five (5) years. Changes in individuals should follow gender and geographical diversity considerations (see B.3.3.4).

B.3.3.10

Specialists in specific areas of RB workplan interest may be invited to RB meetings, or to form part of an RB meeting and/or to provide comments by email when relevant. Specialists are not members of the RB and cannot take part in the decision-making process.

B.3.4 Review Board rules of procedure

B.3.4.1 Regular Review Board meetings

A minimum of one (1) regular RB meeting shall be held per year and will usually take place in the margins of the annual National Directors and United Nations Advisers (NDM-UN) meeting.

B.3.4.2 Extraordinary Review Board meetings

Extraordinary meetings of the RB may be called by the RB chair.

B.3.4.3 Preparation

Either the chair of the RB, or the secretary on his/her behalf, shall circulate a proposed date/time, place and draft agenda for an RB meeting (preferably) a minimum of thirty (30) days before the meeting is to be held. 

Members of the RB may propose an alternative date/time as long as the thirty (30) day notice period is respected. 

Members shall receive copies of the agenda, and any other relevant documents a minimum of twenty-one (21) days before an RB meeting takes place.

Proposed amendments to the agenda may be submitted no later than fifteen (15) days before the meeting is to take place. 

B.3.4.4 Attendance 

RB meetings may be held and/or attended either in person or virtually.

If an RB member or observer is unable to attend a meeting either in person or virtually, they may appoint a proxy to represent their organization. Proxy members shall not be serving members of the SG. Notification should be made in writing to the chair/secretary a minimum of three (3) days prior to the meeting in question. Attending proxy members shall have the right of a proxy vote on behalf of the named member.

B.3.4.5 Conduct of business

RB meetings are conducted in English. The chair of the RB shall open and close the RB meeting, direct the discussion, ensure observance of the Rules of Procedure, accord the right to speak, put questions and announce decisions. He or she shall rule on points of order, subject to the rules of procedure, and shall have control of the proceedings and over the maintenance of order at any RB meeting. 

Any member or the secretary may at any time raise a point of order, which shall be immediately decided by the chair of the RB. Any member may appeal against the ruling and the appeal shall be immediately put to a vote. The chair’s ruling on the Point of Order shall stand unless overruled by a simple majority of votes cast by members present.

B.3.4.6 Role of the chair

The chair of the RB is responsible for conducting RB meetings in accordance with the rules of procedure outlined herein. Terms of Reference for the chair of the RB are found in Appendix 2 to this Annex. 

B.3.4.7 Role of the secretary 

The secretary of the RB is responsible for the coordination of all RB planning and the organization of meetings. In consultation with the chair of the RB, the secretary will produce and archive supporting documentation, records of meetings and decisions, and ensure circulation of information. The secretary reports to the chair of the RB. Terms of Reference for the Secretary of the RB are found in Appendix 2 to this Annex

The secretary shall keep versions of former versions of IMAS documents including withdrawn IMAS documents.

B.3.4.8 Role of the members 

Members of the RB are responsible for responding to requests from the RB secretary or chair for comments and inputs to IMAS documents, such as existing, new or revised IMAS, TNMAs, T&EPs, the RB workplan or any other items of RB interest. Members shall provide informed and constructive comments and propose precise new text or clear concerns when responding to requests for comments. Members should refrain from providing generalized contributions.

Representatives are responsible for seeking input from within their member organization and representing their organization’s common position. All inputs from a member organization must be made through its representative.

It is possible that a representative may be asked by the RB to elicit the opinion of a selection of the functional group to which they belong. For instance, a commercial company member may be requested to elicit the views of other commercial companies.

Terms of Reference for members of the RB are found in Appendix 2 to this Annex. 

B.3.4.9 Records of meeting 

The secretary shall circulate the minutes of each RB meeting within fifteen (15) days. The minutes will include: 

1. A summary of matters discussed (minutes);
2. A list of follow up actions including responsibilities and approximate timelines; and
3. A record of attendance.

B.3.4.10 Work procedures

The majority of RB work will involve responding to emailed requests for comments on specific IMAS documents or sections contained therein, from the chair or the secretary. Members are expected to respond within a specific timeframe, preferably by submitting constructive comments (which can be either an agreement or disagreement) and by providing alternative suggestions to the text as required. After one month, no comment will be assumed to be an agreement. RB members may request an extension.

The secretary shall coordinate responses and having consulted the chair of the RB, shall either re-submit a revised text for consideration or incorporate the majority agreement into the IMAS for further administrative processing.

Once a year, there will be a physical meeting of the RB to which all members will be invited. An RB meeting will be rescheduled if more than half of the invited members cannot attend. At the meeting, issues of relevance shall be discussed and, where relevant, a decision on the way to proceed will be made.

The RB develops an RB workplan, that shall be approved by the SG, which forms the basis of the work of the RB and any TWG. The RB workplan sets out which IMAS, TNMAs and T&EPs are to be drafted or reviewed during a time bound period.

B.3.4.11 Decision-making principles

Decision-making within the RB should reflect the principle of consensus wherever possible. The chair shall strive for the whole of RB agreement through discussion, and by encouraging the participation of all members. 

B.3.4.12 Voting rules

In situations where consensus is not achieved, members may call for a vote in order to bring about a decision, particularly where a delay in decision-making would have negative consequences for the sector.

Voting options are a simple vote or a general vote.

A Simple Vote shall require a majority of the attending members to carry the motion. Simple Votes are taken for routine, non-contentious matters that arise during the RB meeting.

The chair may call for a General Vote when a contentious issue arises. A request for a General Vote cannot be made after a Simple Vote because one or more members disagree with the result. A General Vote will involve every member of the RB and unless all RB members are present at the RB meeting, will be carried out virtually. An issue shall be carried by a simple majority.

After voting has produced a decision a minimum of six (6) months shall elapse before the same subject can be re-submitted for a vote.

In order to reduce unnecessary bureaucracy and administration, minor decisions and corrections may be made to IMAS documents by the secretary and chair of the RB in good faith and gauging the general opinion of the RB.

B.3.4.13 Virtual decision making

The RB may take decisions virtually in the following circumstances: 

1. A decision was not reached during an RB meeting;
2. An RB discussion led to a request for further information from one or more members, or from a TWG prior to a vote; 
3. A decision taken during an RB meeting was made dependent on the provision of further information by a member or TWG; and
4. The RB has not convened or is unable to meet for a period of more than twelve (12) months.

In the case where a remote procedure is invoked, the chair of the RB, or the secretary on behalf of the chair, shall circulate an email to members elaborating clearly and succinctly the circumstances surrounding the point to be addressed virtually, including background on the issue, a summary of discussions to date, and any relevant references to minutes or other records of discussion (these should be attached to the message ) and the deadline for submitting a vote. Members should be reminded that a silence procedure (see below) will prevail should they not cast their vote before the indicated deadline.

B.3.4.14 Virtual voting procedures

B.3.4.14.1 Voting to approve IMAS documents

For decisions made virtually, and where RB members are requested to vote on the approval of an IMAS document, including IMAS, TNMAs and T&EP, members will be given a minimum of twenty-one (21) days to provide a vote by email to the secretary. A vote on the approval of an IMAS document must receive responses from more than two-thirds of the full membership for the motion to be carried. If this is not achieved, the voting period can be extended by a further seven (7) days. If after the additional seven (7) days, a member has not submitted their vote, a silence procedure will be applied, and their vote will be recorded as positive. Votes shall be carried by a simple majority.

B.3.4.14.2 For all other decisions

In order to avoid delays in decision-making, other than the decision to approve IMAS content (see above), virtual decisions will be subject to a silence procedure. Members shall have fourteen (14) days to cast their vote by email to the secretary. After this time has elapsed, if a member has not submitted their vote, their vote shall be recorded as a positive vote. In exceptional circumstances, members may request an additional seven (7) day period for responding. This additional time may be granted at the discretion of the chair of the RB. Votes will be carried by a simple majority.

B4. IMAS technical working groups

Technical working groups (TWGs) are the means by which the RB engages in the process of the development of new IMAS content and carries out significant revisions to existing texts. The justification for the use of TWGs is two-fold:

1. There is limited time during RB meetings to engage in detailed discussions on the IMAS content that is being presented limiting a rich exchange of viewpoints. A TWG allows interested representatives of the RB to participate in detailed discussions and bring the viewpoints and experiences of their organizations to bear in a smaller forum than the RB meeting, through a number of facilitated discussions. This allows members to consult with their organizations during the development process; and
2. The more informal format of TWGs allows the integration of specific technical experts (who may not themselves be representatives on the RB) into discussions, and as key authors for text. On selected technical themes it is important to have the input of highly qualified experts involved in discussions. The ability to combine this outside technical advice with inputs from informed RB members in a series of focused discussions provides a better and more acceptable result in terms of the quality of content to be presented to the RB and allows a more rapid evolution of content during the development process and through to adoption of new guidance.

B.4.1. Work procedures

The TWGs are used to develop content across a broad variety of themes and contexts (from small-scale edits to large-scale developments of new text). As such the work procedures must be flexible enough to manage a diverse number of situations, but also to provide direction to the TWGs to ensure transparency, inclusiveness, and sound management of the groups. The TWGs require a degree of autonomy, but the principle that they are working under the direction of the RB should be mainstreamed throughout TWG procedures.

B.4.2. Nomination of a technical working group

TWGs are convened to respond to items on the RB workplan. When a proposal has been agreed by the RB to be included in the workplan approved by the SG, a decision regarding whether a TWG is required should be made. A Focal Point for the TWG should be proposed during the discussion and approved by the RB. The Focal Point shall be either an RB member or work for an RB member organization.

B.4.3. Selection of technical working group members

Once the Focal Point of the TWG has been selected, RB members should have the opportunity to express their interest in participating in the TWG. All RB members who desire to take part in the TWG should be allowed to participate. RB members may also suggest alternative members from their organizations to  take part in a TWG, to act on their behalf subject to the approval of other TWG members.

Outside technical experts or consultants may be helpful for highly technical deliberations on certain themes. Thus, persons or organizations that are not RB members may also be invited to take part in the TWG subject to approval by members of the TWG, and prior to taking part in TWG meetings.

B.4.4. Mandate and terms of reference of the technical working group

The mandate of the TWG will be provided by the RB and recorded precisely in the minutes of the RB meeting. The TWG Terms of Reference will be drafted by the group at their first meeting and agreed upon by the group by consensus prior to submission to the RB for approval which may be sought by email through the secretary and confirmed through a silence procedure.

B.4.5. Functioning of the technical working group

The TWG Focal Point will serve as chair of the TWG during meetings of the group. The TWG chair will ensure: 1) that Terms of Reference have been established; 2) that a schedule of meetings has been established; 3) that the membership of the TWG has been established; and 4) that meetings of the TWG function in a transparent, inclusive and orderly manner.

Meetings should be carried out according to an agenda that has been shared with participants in advance of the meeting. Any member can suggest items for the upcoming TWG meeting agenda.

During the TWG discussions, the TWG chair should ensure that meetings allow for all viewpoints to be expressed and that all suggestions in terms of IMAS content are shared and discussed with the members of the TWG. Meetings should be managed based on the principle of consensus decision making. If various camps of viewpoints develop, this may eventually call for the development of a majority opinion – however, all differing opinions should be recorded and shared with the RB.

Minutes of every meeting should be recorded, including: the names of participants, the themes discussed, decisions taken, and any points of disagreement. These minutes should be shared with all participants within fifteen (15) days of the end of the meeting, as well as with the RB secretary.

B.4.6. Reporting to the Review Board

TWGs are created under the auspices of the RB, and as a result, any outside communications regarding the proceedings of the TWG, or formal reports, should be communicated through the secretary and chair of the RB only.

A report shall be submitted to the RB secretary at the end of the deliberations of the TWG’s work, and/or prior to upcoming RB meetings. If requested, the TWG Focal Point should report progress during meetings of the RB. TWG reports may also be shared with the RB members by email through the secretary.

Appendix 1 to Annex B (normative) terms of reference for members of IMAS Steering Group

1. Terms of Reference for the chair of the IMAS Steering Group.

1.1 How selected:

The chair of the IMAS Steering Group (SG) is the director of the UN Mine Action Service (UNMAS).

1.2 Tenure:

Indefinite

1.3 Responsibilities:

1. to chair meetings of the SG in accordance with the rules of procedure outlined in IMAS 01.10;
2. to report to and to present relevant SG decisions of substance to the Inter-Agency Coordination Group - Mine Action; and,
3. to provide guidance and advice as necessary to the Chair of the IMAS RB.

2. Terms of Reference for the secretary of the IMAS Steering Group.

2.1 How selected:

The Secretary of the IMAS Steering Group (SG) is provided by the Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining (GICHD).

2.2 Tenure:

Indefinite

2.3 Responsibilities:

1. to plan and organize meetings, in cooperation with the SG chair;
2. to produce the agendas for meetings;
3. to produce minutes of the meetings held. The first drafts of the Minutes of the meetings are submitted to the chair for initial approval and the second draft to the members for their comment;
4. to publish the agreed Minutes on the IMAS website; and
5. to act as the point of coordination for all SG information circulation.

3. Terms of Reference for members of the IMAS Steering Group

3.1 How Selected:

Representatives of the permanent members       are appointed by virtue of their responsibilities within the respective organizations that are permanent members of the IMAS Steering Group (SG). 

The donor representative is the chair of the Mine Action Support Group (MASG).

The NMAA representative is appointed through a meeting of the NMAA held at meetings of National Mine Action Directors and UN Advisers or other appropriate forums as determined by the permanent members of the SG.

3.2 Tenure:

Permanent members serve indefinitely at the discretion of their organizations.

The donor and NMAA representatives are reviewed after a period of two years.

3.3 Responsibilities:

1. to provide strategic direction and policy guidance to the IMAS Review Board (RB);
2. to review the annual RB workplan and ensure that the proposed work is necessary, developed in accordance with the rules of procedure outlined in IMAS 01.10, is in line with the needs of the sector and is appropriate for inclusion within IMAS;
3. to review the RB submissions of new and revised IMAS and to ensure that they have been developed in accordance with the rules of procedure outlined in IMAS 01.10;
4. to review the RB membership and ensure that the composition remains appropriate, representative and is in line with the rules of procedure outlined in IMAS 01.10; and
5. to attend SG meetings, and when not possible, to appoint a suitably experienced and knowledgeable deputy to attend.

Appendix 2 to Annex B (normative) terms of reference for members of IMAS Review Board

1. Terms of Reference for the Chair of the IMAS Review Board

1.1 How selected:

The Chair of the IMAS Review Board (RB) is nominated by the Director of the UN Mine Action Service (UNMAS) and is provided by UNMAS.

1.2 Tenure:

Indefinite

1.3 Responsibilities:

1. to chair meetings of the RB, the dates of which are to be mutually agreed with the secretary;
2. to report to and to present relevant RB decisions of substance to the IMAS Steering Group for onward transmission to the Inter-Agency Coordination Group - Mine Action;
3. to propose new members; and d) to provide guidance and advice as necessary to the secretary.

2. Terms of Reference for the secretary of the IMAS Review Board

2.1 How selected:

The secretary of the IMAS Review Board (RB) is nominated by the director of the Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining (GICHD) and is provided by the GICHD.

2.2 Tenure:

Indefinite

2.3 Responsibilities:

1. to plan and organize the annual meeting, and any required ad-hoc meetings, in cooperation with the chair of the RB;
2. to produce the annual meeting agenda;
3. to produce minutes of meetings held. The first draft of the minutes should be submitted to the chair for review prior to onward transmission to members for their comment;
4. to publish the agreed minutes on the IMAS website;
5. to act as the point of contact for all RB information circulation;
6. to produce an annual workplan for RB review prior to IMAS Steering Group (SG) approval that aims to ensure that each IMAS is reviewed at least once every five years;
7. to circulate documents to RB members for comments and inputs as necessary and to coordinate and collate replies;
8. to amend IMAS in accordance with the approval of the RB, review by the SG and endorsement of the Inter-Agency Coordination Group - Mine Action; and
9. to resource mobilize as necessary to enable the RB to function.

3. Terms of Reference for the members of the IMAS Review Board

3.1 How selected:

See Annex B.3.3.4

3.2 Tenure:

See Annex B.3.3.9

3.3 Responsibilities:

1. to accept, or comment on, the IMAS Review Board (RB) workplan elaborated by the secretary of the RB;
2. to respond to requests, from the secretary or chair of the RB, for comment and input into IMAS documentation;
3. to engage in voting procedures;
4. to provide informed comment based on experience;
5. to provide constructive comment proposing specific new text or elaborating clear concerns when responding to requests for comment, to refrain from general statements;
6. to seek peer input as appropriate; and if possible
7. to attend RB meetings.

Appendix 3 to Annex B (normative) terms of reference for members of IMAS technical working groups

1. Terms of Reference for the focal point of an IMAS technical working group

1.1 How selected:

The Focal Point of the IMAS Technical Working Group (TWG) is chosen by the IMAS Review Board (RB)

1.2 Tenure:

Finite. Limited to the standing period of the TWG.

1.3 Responsibilities:

1. to establish a TWG Terms of Reference, in accordance with its mandate provided by the RB;
2. to establish the membership of the TWG;
3. to chair meetings and coordinate the work of the TWG;
4. to ensure that TWG meetings function in a transparent, inclusive, and orderly manner;
5. to establish a meeting schedule;
6. to ensure minutes of TWG meetings are recorded;
7. to submit a report to the RB, through the RB secretary at the end of deliberations of the TWG work; and,
8. if requested, to present on the work of the TWG at RB meetings.

2. Terms of Reference for Members of an IMAS Technical Working Group

2.1 How selected:

See Annex B.4.3

2.2 Tenure:

Finite. Limited to the standing period of the IMAS technical working group (TWG). See B.4.3

2.3 Responsibilities:

1. to respond to requests, from the TWG focal point for comments and inputs into drafts for new IMAS, revision drafts of existing IMAS, etc.;
2. to provide informed comments based on both personal experiences, and/or the experience of their organisation, based on prior consultations;
3. to propose, where possible, new text or clear explanations that outline concerns when responding to requests for comments, rather than general statements of opposition;
4. to seek peer input as appropriate; and
5. to attend TWG meetings.

Annex C (normative) Proposal and justification for amending or withdrawing an existing, or developing a new IMAS document

This form is intended to provide the starting point in a process that identifies both shortcomings and improvements needed in International Mine Action Standards (IMAS) Technical Notes on Mine Action (TNMA) and Test and Evaluation Protocols (T&EP).

After it has been properly completed and submitted, the proposal will be reviewed by the chair and the secretary of the IMAS Review Board who will then include their comments, if any, and circulate it to the Review Board. If there is support for the proposal from at least 25% of the Review Board’s members, the process will continue.

Note 1:        When the Review Board supports the proposal, it is submitted to the IMAS Steering Group for approval and inclusion in the IMAS RB workplan.

Note 2:        In the event of amendments to an existing IMAS, this form will only be used when the amendments are substantial (e.g. NMAA and mine action-organizations may need to amend their national standards and/or SOPs).

Note 3.        When the Review Board cannot agree on a proposal, the issue will be put to the IMAS Steering Group for a final decision.

View the online Proposal and Justification for Amending an Existing, or Developing a New IMAS form here

Annex D (normative) Approval stages for IMAS documents

Table 1 details the approval stages for International Mine Action Standards (IMAS), Technical Notes for Mine Action (TNMA) and Test and Evaluation Protocols (T&EP) that shall be applied.

Approval shall apply to new and amended documents, and when documents are withdrawn from the IMAS series.

For new, amended and withdrawn IMAS, there are three sequential approval stages (see table 1). For new, amended and withdrawn TNMAs and T&EPs there is only one required approval stage (see table 1)

For IMAS the approval stages are sequential. First, IMAS shall be approved by the IMAS Review Board. Second, they shall be adopted by the IMAS Steering Group. Finally, they shall be endorsed by the United Nations Inter-Agency Coordination Group on Mine Action.

Table 1. Approval stages for IMAS, TNMAs and T&EPs

Annex E (normative) Storage and publication of IMAS documents

E.1 Purpose

This annex sets minimum requirements to ensure that IMAS documents are accessible to users, and safely archived.

E.2 Scope

The guidelines establish how storage and publication of IMAS documents shall be managed according to their status. They also establish the location of IMAS documents and set the roles and responsibilities for IMAS document management.

The guidelines apply to the management of the following types of IMAS documents:

1.   International Mine Action Standards.

2.   Technical Notes for Mine Action.

3.   Test & Evaluation Protocols.

E.3 Document status

IMAS documents shall be classified with one of the following statuses: ‘current’, ‘superseded’ or ‘withdrawn’.

E.3.1 Current documents

A document classified as ‘current’ refers to an IMAS document that is the latest approved and active version of an IMAS document.

E.3.2 Superseded documents

A document classified as ‘superseded’ refers to an IMAS document that has been replaced with an amended or new edition of an IMAS document. For example, at publication date IMAS 10.20 version 2, would replace IMAS 10.20 version 1 which would become ‘superseded’.

E.3.3 Withdrawn documents

A document classified as ‘withdrawn’ refers to an IMAS document that has been removed from the IMAS framework.

E.4 Location of IMAS documents

Current IMAS documents shall be published on the IMAS website www.mineactionstandards.org both in Portable Document Format (PDF) and as an online version. These documents shall be accessible at any time and for free.

Copies of current IMAS documents shall be stored both as PDF and MS Word in a separate drive, managed by the secretary of the IMAS RB.

Superseded and withdrawn IMAS documents shall be removed from the IMAS website. They shall be stored in a separate drive, managed by the secretary of the IMAS RB. Superseded and withdrawn documents shall not be available online, so as to prevent the use of superseded or withdrawn IMAS.

E.3.5 Roles and responsibilities

The secretary of the IMAS RB shall manage IMAS documents on the IMAS website and in the storage drive. The IMAS secretary shall manage any requests for IMAS documents stored on the storage drive.

Amendment record

Management of IMAS amendments

The IMAS series of standards are subject to formal review on a three-yearly basis; however, this does not preclude amendments being made within these three-year periods for reasons of operational safety and efficiency or for editorial purposes. As amendments are made to this IMAS they will be given a number, and the date and general details of the amendment shown in the table below. The amendment will also be shown on the cover page of the IMAS by the inclusion under the edition date of the phrase ‘incorporating amendment number(s) 1 etc.’ As the formal reviews of each IMAS are completed new editions may be issued. Amendments up to the date of the new edition will be incorporated into the new edition and the amendment record table cleared. Recording of amendments will then start again until a further review is carried out. The most recently amended IMAS will be the versions that are posted on the IMAS website.

Number	Date	Amendment Details
1	01 Dec 2004	Formatting changes. Minor text editing changes. Changes to terms, definitions and abbreviations where necessary to ensure that this IMAS is consistent with IMAS 04.10.
2	23 Jul 2005	Annex A, change to the definition of ‘Mine Risk Education (MRE)’ to be consistent with IMAS 04.10.
3	01 Aug 2006	Minor changes/additions to the first and second paragraph of the foreword. Clause 4, move third paragraph up as the first paragraph with some minor text changes. Inclusion of the term ‘mines and ERW’. Removal of the term ‘threat’.
4	22 Apr 2008	Inclusion of clause 2, renumbering of subsequent clauses, addition of an Annex A “normative references”, and re-lettering of other Annexes. Minor changes to clause 6.5-a, and addition of Protocol V of CCW in 6.5-b Addition of AXO and CCW definitions in Annex B
5	11 Nov 2009	Minor changes throughout. Updating definition of Mine Action. Inclusion of cluster munitions convention and minor additions to that effect. Ensuring inclusion of gender and diversity issues -minor additions to that effect. Updating normative references. Removal of Annex B terms and definitions and its references from all IMAS series.
6	08 Jun 2010	Amendments to Clause 12 to reflect the current RB composition. Removal of Annex B “guide to risk management” and its reference in Clause 9. Inclusion of reference to IMAS 07.10, 08.20, 08.21 and 08.22 in clause 9, and to the normative references. Inclusion of IMAS management structure and TOR for RB at Annex B. Inclusion of justification template for amendment of the existing or production of new IMAS at Annex C.
7	01 Aug 2012	Addition of footnote to Introduction to clarify extent of the term ERW in view of the new IATG. Amendment to Clause 6.4 to include IMAS compliance with IATG. Amendment to Clause 12.2.b to include IATG Representative on IATG Review Board. Amendment to Annex A to include IATG as informative reference. Amendment to Annex B to include new Clause B.2.7 for IATG Representative. Subsequent Clauses in Annex renumbered. 6Reviewed for impact of IATG development. Minor typographical amendments.
8	10 Jun 2013	Amendment number included in the title and header. References updated in clause 9 and Annex A.
9	21 March 2018	Use of the term ‘Explosive Ordnance’ to replace ‘landmines and Explosive Remnants of War (ERW) including unexploded sub-munitions throughout. Use of term ‘Capacity Building’ replaced with ‘Capacity Development’ throughout. Use of term ‘commercial demining companies/contractors’ replaced with ‘commercial companies/contractors’ throughout. Use of term ‘Chairman’ replaced with ‘Chair’ throughout. Amendment of Clause 4 to; include footnote reference to IMAS 09.60, expand on IMAS definition of ‘Explosive Ordnance’, update five complementary activities, and include footnote reference to Resolution A/C.4/72/L.12. Clause 6.1 renamed ‘National ownership’. Amendment of Clause 6.1 additional text on responsibilities. Clause 6.2 renamed ‘Humanitarian principles’. Amendment of Clause 6.2, text updated. Clause 6.3 renamed ‘Capacity Development’. Clause 8 renamed ‘Contextual Guidance for the Application of IMAS’. Clauses; 8.1 ‘Humanitarian response’, 8.2 ‘Immediate Post-Conflict Clearance’ and 8.3 ‘Systematic Survey, Clearance and Mine Action’ added. 1Amendment to Clause 9 to remove first five paragraphs.
10	13 October 2021	Title updated to read: Guide for the application and development of International Mine Action Standards (IMAS). Scope updated to include development and maintenance of IMAS. Footnote added to section 12.1. Section 12.3 amended to reflect updated role and composition of the Steering Group. Annex A updated to include IMAS 07.12 and IMAS 07.14. New section B.2. ‘IMAS Steering Group’ incorporated to Annex B. Numbering updated throughout Annex B. Inclusion of new Appendix 1 to Annex B ‘Terms of Reference for members of IMAS Steering Group’. ‘Terms of reference for members of IMAS Review Board’ moved to Appendix 2 to Annex B. Terms of reference for the ‘Chair of the IMAS Review Board’ updated. ‘Table of IMAS Management Structure’ removed. Introduction and Clause 4 bullet a.: Use of the term ‘explosive ordnance risk education (EORE)’ to replace ‘mine risk education (MRE)’ Footnote 2: Addition of term ‘community mine action liaison’ to align with current IMAS definition. Clause 6.3: Description of ‘capacity development’ amended to current UNDP description. Related footnote 7 updated to the correct URL. Clause 6.3: Use of the term ‘explosive ordnance’ to replace ‘ERW’. Clause 6.4: Use of the word ‘boys and girls’ to replace ‘children’. Clause 7 first paragraph: ISO URL updated. Clause 9 second paragraph: Replace reference to QM ISO with QM IMAS 07.12 Clause 12.4: Amended to reflect updated role and composition of the Review Board. Membership slots amended to: reduce donors representatives from 3 to 2; National Programme from 4 to 5; INGO from 4 to 7; GICHD from 0 to 1 and ISU from 0 to 1. Clause 12.5: New section on Technical Working Groups added to reflect increased formalised role of TWG. Annex A. b): Title of IMAS corrected. Annex B, Section B.3. Most of section redrafted based on EY evaluation, RB member comments, and to align to revised Annex B, new section Section B.2 added on 30 Nov 2020 (see previous amendment record section above. Annex B, Section B.4. ‘Technical Working Groups, incorporated to Annex B. Terms of Reference Appendix 2 and 3 added for RB and TWG respectively.
11	3 July 2024	Inclusion of new Annexes: Annex D and Anne E Inclusion of language related to ‘withdrawal’ of IMAS documents from the IMAS series. Amendment of section B.3.3.8 to clarify RB member revalidation process IMAS reformatted to current IMAS template Some spelling of words aligned to Oxford English

 

Footnotes

¹ The term ERW is increasingly covering the clearance of undesirable explosions in ammunition storage areas. The techniques for which are covered in IATG 11.20 ASA Explosions – EOD Clearance.

² Includes technical survey, mapping, clearance, marking, post-clearance documentation, community mine action liaison and handover of cleared land. (See IMAS 04.10 for the full definition).

³ In addition to the impact on contaminated land, mine action interventions apply to survey and clearance operations within the territorial waters of a nation (generally within 12 nautical miles of shore) and inland waters; this includes coastal waters, lakes, rivers, ports, harbours, ponds and canals below the Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) mark to a water depth of 50 meters or less. (See IMAS 09.60).

⁴ Mine Action and Effective Coordination: The United Nations Policy. Resolution A/53/26 on Assistance in Mine Action, adopted 17 November 1998.

⁵ Resolution A/C.4/72/L.12 on Assistance in Mine Action, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly Fourth Committee on Special Political and Decolonisation Committee, adopted 27 October 2017

⁶ In this case, international requirements and specifications refers to those treaties, international laws and conventions, international agreements, international ISO standards etc. that have already been agreed to by participating nations.

⁷ Taken from UNDP Definition at https://www.undp.org/content/dam/aplaws/publication/en/publications/capacity-development/capacitydevelopment-a-undp-primer/CDG_PrimerReport_final_web.pdf

⁸ The Review Board may decide to recommend to the Steering Group that the issue is included in the annual IMAS workplan

⁹ Includes National NGOs, national commercial companies and contractors, and regional mine action organisations