c) Compliance: ensure legality is correctly monitored throughout the life cycle of weapon systems
(126) Article 36 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 relating to the protection of victims of international armed conflicts of 8 June 1977 (Protocol I) stipulates that “In the study, development, acquisition or adoption of a new weapon, means or method of warfare, a High Contracting Party is under an obligation to determine whether its employment would, in some or all circumstances, be prohibited by this Protocol or by any other rule of international law applicable to the High Contracting Party.”
(127) While International Humanitarian Law is important, the Committee stresses that French law is extremely righteous and can even be more restrictive.
(128) Fulfilling its commitments, France transposed the conditions of this legal review and specified how this analysis of compliance with international law is applied at every stage in defence procurement. It particularly emphasises that the review is conducted, as required, during the various phases of a weapon system’s life cycle: preparation, production and operational use. During this last and often longest phase, it is required whenever “obsolescence or integration of innovations into the weapon, means or doctrine contribute to changing the functions in a manner that could challenge the previous legality opinion.”
(129) In light of the abovementioned risks, the Committee stresses the importance and pertinence of conducting a complete legal review whenever decision-making autonomy, according to the robotics meaning as defined in the preamble, is developed in a lethal weapon system, especially as far as identification, classification and opening fire functions are concerned.
G15: Define appropriate methods for monitoring legality in light of the new challenges induced by integrating decision-making autonomy into functions assigned to PALWS.
(130) A risk analysis method dedicated to partially autonomous systems could be added to the existing regulatory corpus applicable to the acquisition of PALWS. This method would be provided to capacity-building experts during the requirement specification phase. It would cover every stage in the process of meeting the operational requirement and detail the ethical risks associated with each function.
G16: A risk, functional and value analysis method dedicated to the expected level of decision-making autonomy should be set up from the very beginning of the military requirement specification. This method should cover every stage of the process of meeting the requirements, including off-the-shelf devices and software, support functions and operational readiness services.
Defence Ethics Committee, Opinion on the Integration of Autonomy into Lethal Weapon Systems (Ministry of Armed Forces, 29 April 2021) 30
