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.
7 positions Chile (remove filter)
2026
Statement by Chile
I do want to dwell on it a moment though because it seems to be particularly important to us. The obligation of a legal review is not the only legal obligation when it comes to the study, development, acquisition or adoption of LAWS. According to …
REAIM Pathways to Action
… 7. Building on the Call to Action advanced at the REAIM Summit 2023 in The Hague and the Blueprint for Action advanced at the REAIM Summit 2024 in Seoul, convinced that the time has come to take steps towards operationalization of the principles reflected …
2024
Submission by Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Kazakhstan, Nigeria, Panama, Peru, the Philippines, Sierra Leone and State of Palestine to the Secretary-General
The draft Protocol includes a preamble and eight (8) articles: (1) General Provisions, (2) Characterization, (3) Prohibitions, (4) Regulations, (5) Review of Weapons, (6) Risk Mitigation, (7) Compliance, and (8) Consultations of High Contracting Parties …. [Annex: CCW/GGE.1/2023/WP.6]
2022
Elements for a Legally Binding Instrument to Address the Challenges Posed by Autonomy in Weapon Systems
V. Legal Weapons Review 22. Legal weapons review must include an assessment that allows for the understanding of the attributes and effects in weapons with autonomous capabilities, as well as its conformity with international humanitarian law and international law, in particular: (a) Evaluate its technical …
Working paper
1. This Working Paper sets out the following considerations and elements for the future work of the Group. The GGE should: … 13. Recall the obligation for States to conduct national weapon reviews, as codified in Article 36 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva …
2021
Elements for a Future Normative Framework
Recommendations towards a normative framework 11. In the study, development, acquisition or adoption of any AWS, States must be able to determine whether its employment would, in some or all circumstances, be prohibited by IHL or any other applicable rule of international law. It is …
Joint submission on possible consensus recommendations
IV. Weapons Reviews Weapons reviews, including art. 36 reviews, will continue to play an important role in weapons development. In the evaluation of weapons systems based on emerging technologies in the area of LAWS, key challenges in the regulation and the nature of the systems …