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.
10 positions Finland (remove filter)
2026
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 …
2022
Working Paper
B. In order to operationalize the two-tier approach, the HCP should: (b) Commit to only develop, produce, acquire, modify, deploy or use lethal weapons systems featuring autonomy when the following provisions are fulfilled: i. compliance with international law is ensured when studying, acquiring, adopting or …
2021
Written contribution of Finland on possible consensus recommendations
Weapon systems including autonomous features or functions and the intended military task to be resolved require contextual review. To determine compliance/non-compliance with IHL of LAWS for the given task in certain circumstances, three interlinked key elements should be studied in all phases of preparation and …
2020
National Commentary by Finland
A rigorous weapons review, in line with Article 36 of [AP I], is essential for determining the legality of any new means or method of warfare. In the area of emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence and machine autonomy, the review needs to be critical, …
Finland, CCW Annual Report
The Defense Command of Finland has issued a decree for the Finnish Defense Forces on the process of reviewing the legality of new weapons, means or methods of warfare in accordance with Article 36 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva Conventions.) …
2019
Statement by Finland
We feel that our discussions should actually reflect the issue of trust: trust between a human and the machine in respect to the authorisation of force. Only trusted systems can be authorized to execute tasks defined by humans. To ascertain this trust, we emphasize the …
2018
Statement by Finland
The obligation to carry out legal reviews of new weapons under article 36 of [AP I] is crucial for ensuring that a State’s armed forces are capable of conducting hostilities in accordance with its international obligations. We call for the universalization of this important protocol …
Statement by Finland
When considering the human element in the use of lethal force, Finland believes that compliance with international humanitarian and human rights law is a key component. The notion that humans will now and in the future exert control over decisions of life and death needs …
2016
Statement by Finland
We further underline, that each and every state has the ultimate responsibility in every situation where norms of international humanitarian or human rights law are breached. This includes of course the provisions in the Geneva conventions first additional protocol on the review of the legality …
2005
IHL and ERW: Response from Finland
10. As an example in relation to this, we could mention the procedure of reporting on security and defence policy, which presents e.g. military threats, grounds for the development of the defence system as well as supporting society and the effects of international (humanitarian) conventions …