6.20 States party to Additional Protocol I are under an obligation ‘in the study, development, acquisition or adoption of a new weapon, means or method of warfare . . . to determine whether its employment would, in some or all circumstances, be prohibited by [Additional Protocol I] or by any other rule of international law’.94 6.20.1 This …
1. The United Kingdom recognises that all explosive munitions are capable of becoming Explosive Remnants of War. This is because all explosive ordnance is capable of failing to explode as intended. The United Kingdom therefore considers that the question relates to the use of all explosive munitions, including cluster munitions, during an armed conflict. When planning …
Article 36 Weapons Reviews are the correct means to assess a weapon, means, or method of warfare and its use, as required by Additional Protocol 1 to the Geneva Convention. The UK is aware that despite the large numbers of States being signatories to the first Protocol, not all formally conduct legal weapons reviews. Conversely …
From our perspective, to discuss LAWS is to discuss means and methods of warfare. As such, international humanitarian law provides the appropriate paradigm for discussion. To that end, we look forward to sharing our views on the process of Legal Weapons Review. That is a process which has been developed exactly for situations like the …
3. The UK takes its obligations under IHL extremely seriously. As required by Additional Protocol 1 to the Geneva Convention, the UK conducts legal reviews of weapons in accordance with Article 36 of the Protocol. The UK is aware that despite the large numbers of States being signatories to the first Protocol, not all formally conduct …
5. Article 36 of [API] requires States to determine whether new weapons, means or methods of warfare may be employed lawfully under International Law. The United Kingdom takes this very seriously, and has published its weapons review procedures online in a document that sets out how the UK fulfils its Article 36 obligations. We hope that …
3. … It [sic] not arbitrary, but it is a fact that no weapons system possessed by the UK is fully autonomous. Existing highly automated weapons meet the stringent standards of Article 36 legal weapons reviews. 6. … Focus on the level of human control in weapons systems, as required under the four fundamental principles of IHL …
Accountability measures are built in throughout the lifecycle of weapons systems — from concept, to initial development, through the assessment of legal use and acceptance into service, and ultimately the decision to deploy a system operationally. This is written into the technical standards governing their development to their assessment through the medium of Article 36 …
2. … The UK’s clear position is that IHL and Article 36 Weapons Reviews are the applicable legal framework for the assessment and use of all weapons systems in armed conflict, including new and novel weapons technologies, in order to ensure their effects are thoroughly assessed and understood. 3. The UK has published its weapons review procedures …
11. … Assessment, evaluation and revision of both the system and the surrounding political, strategic, operational and tactical ‘wrap’ is a continuous cycle rather than a linear, sequential process and a combination of factors are required to ensure human control at the appropriate points. These include, but are not limited to: … UK conducts Article …
National Commentary by the United Kingdom (1 September 2020)
United Kingdom
GGE LAWS 2020
As pointed out in the 2019 report of the GGE, exchange of good practice relating to key activities such as legal weapon reviews could be beneficial. We continue to believe this has merit and believe it not only to be an area worthy of focus, but one that should be extended: as well as a …
Weapons Reviews Relevant Guiding Principles: Relevant Consensus Conclusions of the GGE: Potential Areas for Further GGE Consensus Recommendations or Work: Building on Chile’s Proposed Four Elements of Further Work for the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) Group of Governmental Experts (GGE) on Emerging Technologies in the Area of Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems (LAWS): Submitted …
VIII. Good Practices Related to Human-Machine Interaction […] 26. At various stages of the life-cycle of a weapon, the following good practices related to human-machine interaction can strengthen compliance with international humanitarian law, strengthen accountability, and mitigate risks in the use of weapons systems based on emerging technologies in the area of LAWS: (a) Conducting legal …
It is the United Kingdom’s strong belief that the requirement for an anticipatory ban or restrictions on [LAWS] is mitigated by the legal obligation on States to determine whether the employment of such a weapon system would, in some or all circumstances, be prohibited by international law. It is for this reason, the UK supported …
Rather than trying to prevent you asked him some more challenging questions, actually I want to remind us of the homework you presented this week last night. And I want to perhaps now take the opportunity to answer or provide a UK response to one of the questions that you posed us last night, and …
We must also articulate the characteristics of these systems which may have positive or negative implications for compliance with IHL, and their impact upon activities throughout the life cycle of a weapon system, such as those elements that you mentioned in your introduction Mr Chair such as human control and legal weapon reviews. Statement by …
Annex A. Possible outline 1. The following is one possible outline for an IHL Manual as proposed by the UK, by way of illustration of the overall concept. It is based on eight headings, many of which reflect the concept, development and use cycle (‘lifecycle’ ) of a weapons system (adapted from the Sunrise diagram …
Article 1: Preventing Autonomous Weapon Systems That, By Their Nature, Are Incapable of Use in Accordance With IHL IHL prohibits the use of an autonomous weapon system if it is of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering, if it is inherently indiscriminate, or if it is otherwise incapable of being used in …
Legal Framework & Norms … Legal reviews of new weapons means and methods of warfare are crucial to determining whether a system can be used in compliance with IHL — states must revise and develop methodologies and ensure rigorous reviews in step with the emergence of new technologies. … Sharing of Best Practice All parties …
Article 1. Preventing Autonomous Weapon Systems That, By Their Nature, Are Incapable of Use in Accordance With IHL IHL prohibits the use of an autonomous weapon system if it is of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering, if it is inherently indiscriminate, or if it is otherwise incapable of being used in …
