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.
5 positions Estonia (remove filter)
2024
Draft articles on autonomous weapon systems
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, …
Reply by Estonia to the Chair’s Guiding Questions
Weapons reviews are a valuable tool to ensure the compliance of a specific LAWS with international law. We find that in addition to conducting a weapons review when a new weapons system is taken into use, a weapons review should also be conducted when a …
2021
Written contribution of Estonia on possible consensus recommendations
5. … Estonia welcomes the addition of a section dedicated to weapons reviews in the draft elements of possible consensus recommendations. We agree, inter alia, that weapons reviews should be conducted when a weapon is modified or used differently from its original intended use. Estonia …
2017
Statement by Estonia
… A number of states have highlighted the importance of conducting legal reviews of new weapons systems as an implementation mechanism of international humanitarian law. Estonia would support a further discussion on best practices of weapons reviews, especially as concerns technologically complex weapon systems. Estonia …
2005
IHL and ERW: Response from Estonia
9. At the moment Estonia does not possess such mechanism of review. If needed, such analysis will be done on a case-by-case basis to maximize compliance with IHL.