States and some organisations have expressed their views about the utility, purpose, scope and process of the legal review of weapons in various different contexts. Some of these views have been recorded domestic documents, such as military manuals on the law of armed conflict. Increasingly, however, States and organisations have articulated their positions in a range of international fora, either through written submissions or oral interventions.
This database compiles and organises publicly expressed views in relation to legal reviews, without prejudice to their relative significance or effect (for example, in terms of the development of customary international law). The database aims to comprehensively reflect the views of states but only covers the positions of a small number of selected organisations.
This database currently contains 379 positions and is continuously updated. Any corrections, or suggestions to add material, are welcome.
3 positions Article 36 (remove filter)
2015
Statement by Article 36
… in relation to article 36 weapons reviews and processes, we are strongly supportive of efforts to increase scrutiny over the development and use of weapons, means and methods of warfare, including in the context of legal reviews under additional protocol I. We think this …
Statement by Article 36
In relation to weapons review, we would agree with the ICRC that there are too many questions related to AWS to leave it up to national legal reviews of weapons to address them. Application of these reviews is already weak: The level of compliance is …
2014
Statement by Article 36
We are pleased that article 36 reviews of weapons, means and methods of warfare, have been a focus of discussion here as well. Such reviews will need to be based on an understanding of the requirement to ensure meaningful human control over such weapons systems. …