A/HRC/45/CRP.7 Notwithstanding the Security Council’s sanctions regime and its arms embargo on named Houthi individuals, supplies of arms of Iranian origin continue to flow also to the Houthis.631 The Group of Experts is aware of legal proceedings that have been brought in several jurisdictions, questioning the legality of such arms transfers by government officials and companies, as well as the communication filed with the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC by a grouping of international and national NGOs.632 Regardless of the outcome of these proceedings, the Group of Experts observes that the continued supply of weapons to parties involved in the conflict in Yemen perpetuates the conflict and the suffering of the population. 415. The Group of Experts also notes that if a State knowingly aids or assists another State with a view to facilitating the commission by the latter of an internationally wrongful act, it is internationally responsible for doing so (provided that the act would have been wrongful if it had been committed by the assisting State itself).633 This applies not only to arms transfers, but to other forms of support making a significant contribution to the unlawful act(s) such as logistical or technical support, intelligence, or provision of other equipment. Increasingly, it is recognised that providing assistance where there is “virtual certainty” of the assistance being used for a wrongful act will trigger this responsibility.634 Where there is a risk of such unlawful conduct, States should put in place strategies to reduce and mitigate the risks such as attaching conditions to assistance, vetting and training recipients of assistance, and monitoring and following up on risks identified.635 416. All States also have the obligation to cooperate to bring to an end any serious breaches of obligations arising under a peremptory norm of international law.636 States must not recognise as lawful a situation created by a serious breach, nor render aid or assistance in maintaining that situation.637 While there is no explicit (or exhaustive) list of which norms constitute peremptory norms of international law, it is generally agreed that the category includes the prohibition of aggression, genocide, slavery, racial discrimination, crimes against humanity, and torture, as well as the obligation to respect the right of peoples to selfdetermination, and fundamental rules of international humanitarian law.638 “Serious” breaches are those involving a gross or systematic failure by the responsible State to fulfil their obligation.639 417. Member States of the United Nations have pledged themselves to take “joint and separate action in co-operation with the Organisation” to achieve the purpose of promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.640 Most of the core statements.parliament.uk/written-statements/detail/2020-07-07/HCWS339 In April 2020, the Canadian Minister for Foreign Affairs announced that Canada had renegotiated the terms of its arms transfer contract with Saudi Arabia and would be proceeding to a case-by-case examination of export permit applications to ensure compliance with Canadian law and its obligations under the Arms Trade Treaty (which Canada acceded to in September 2019). While Canada earlier imposed a moratorium on new export licenses to Saudi Arabia, this did not apply to existing export licenses, such that there were record high transfers of military equipment from Canada to Saudi Arabia in 2019. Statement available at: https://www.canada.ca/en/global-affairs/news/2020/04/canada-improves-terms-of-lightarmored-vehicles-contract-putting-in-place-a-new-robust-permits-review-process.html 631 S/2020/326. 632 See: https://www.ecchr.eu/fileadmin/Fallbeschreibungen/CaseReport_ECCHR_Mwatana_Amnesty_CAA T_Delas_Rete.pdf 633 International Law Commission Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, art. 16, and the commentary thereto. 634 Chatham House, “Aiding and Assisting: Challenges in Armed Conflict and Counter-Terrorism” (2016), 13. 635 Ibid. 636 International Law Commission Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, art. 41(1). The concept of “serious breach” is outlined in art. 40. 637 Ibid, art. 41(2). 638 See International Law Commission Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, art. 40, with commentaries (2001), pp. 112-113. 639 Ibid. art 40(2). 640 Art. 56, in combination with art. 55 UN Charter. 106