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.
2015
Statement by Germany
With respect to possible approaches to the implementation of the weapons review process, we would like to share our respective national format. In order to foster the implementation of the obligation under Article 36 AP I, Germany has established a Steering Group "Review of new …
Statement by Germany
A number of delegations including Germany have already presented the general outline of their national legal review procedures under Article 36 AP I during this week. We see merit in elaborating further on the idea to share national regulations in this regard, to look for …
Statement by Germany
Technology develops in unforeseeable ways and comes in virtually unlimited varieties of shapes and modes of action. Fundamental principles of International Humanitarian Law in tune with this challenge avoid for good reasons specifications of particular technologies. The general-abstract approach of International Humanitarian Law keeps it …