Australia believes that an aspect of the current system of international law – embodied in Article 36 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 contributes to the robust framework for regulating weapons systems, including those with autonomous functionality. Australia’s approach to Article 36 Reviews was described in detail in the paper “The Australian Article 36 Review Process” (CCW/GGE.2/2018/WP.6).
Article 36 reviews provide an important mechanism for States Parties to test whether the development or acquisition of weapons systems complies with international humanitarian law (IHL). As a party to Additional Protocol I, Australia adheres to the obligation to undertake a review of any new weapon, means or method of warfare, to determine whether its employment would, in some, or all circumstances, be prohibited by IHL or other applicable international law. Australia’s national system of control embodies a suite of laws, regulations, processes, orders and doctrine that ensures all weapons intended for use by the Australian Defence Force during an armed conflict are capable of being used in compliance with Australia’s legal obligations.
Strengthening compliance with existing IHL, including through Article 36 reviews, is the most effective way to manage new weapons systems, including the potential development of LAWS. Australia encourages other nations to undertake weapons reviews, even if they are not a party to Additional Protocol I. States should ensure accountability for developing, deploying and using emerging weapons systems through appropriate review systems, in accordance with applicable domestic and international law.
In this context, Australia has consistently argued that discussions concerning a treaty banning LAWS are premature in the absence of an agreed definition and understanding of the technology – including the benefits it may provide. Australia believes that it is neither necessary nor desirable to ban or create new legal frameworks to regulate LAWS, as this technology may provide many benefits including minimising incidental harm to civilians and reducing risks to military personnel. Instead, we suggest that compliance with existing IHL, including the conduct of Article 36 reviews, may serve to mitigate many of the concerns voiced by some CCW States Parties and interest groups.
