Positions of States and Organisations

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.

2026

  1. REAIM Pathways to Action

    5 February 2026State or organisation: ArmeniaState or organisation: AustriaState or organisation: BelgiumState or organisation: CanadaState or organisation: ChileState or organisation: CyprusState or organisation: CzechiaState or organisation: DenmarkState or organisation: FinlandState or organisation: FranceState or organisation: GeorgiaState or organisation: GermanyState or organisation: GhanaState or organisation: GreeceState or organisation: HungaryState or organisation: IcelandState or organisation: IrelandState or organisation: ItalyState or organisation: LuxembourgState or organisation: MoroccoState or organisation: NetherlandsState or organisation: NorwayState or organisation: PakistanState or organisation: PanamaState or organisation: PhilippinesState or organisation: PortugalState or organisation: Republic of KoreaState or organisation: RomaniaState or organisation: SingaporeState or organisation: SpainState or organisation: SwedenState or organisation: SwitzerlandState or organisation: TürkiyeState or organisation: UkraineState or organisation: United KingdomForum: REAIM

    … 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

  1. Working paper

    8 August 2022State or organisation: ArgentinaState or organisation: AustriaState or organisation: BelgiumState or organisation: ChileState or organisation: Costa RicaState or organisation: EcuadorState or organisation: GuatemalaState or organisation: IrelandState or organisation: KazakhstanState or organisation: LiechtensteinState or organisation: LuxembourgState or organisation: MaltaState or organisation: MexicoState or organisation: New ZealandState or organisation: NigeriaState or organisation: PanamaState or organisation: PeruState or organisation: PhilippinesState or organisation: Sierra LeoneState or organisation: Sri LankaState or organisation: State of PalestineState or organisation: SwitzerlandState or organisation: UruguayForum: GGE LAWS 2022

    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

  1. Joint submission on possible consensus recommendations

    2021State or organisation: AustriaState or organisation: BrazilState or organisation: ChileState or organisation: IrelandState or organisation: LuxembourgState or organisation: MexicoState or organisation: New ZealandForum: GGE LAWS 2021

    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 …

2019

  1. Food for Thought Paper

    28 March 2019State or organisation: BelgiumState or organisation: IrelandState or organisation: LuxembourgForum: GGE LAWS 2019

    6. In previous discussions, a number of States pointed to the importance of conducting legal reviews of new weapons, in accordance with international law and more particularly with article 36 of [API]. In our view, this remains a useful and important avenue to ensure that …

  2. Statement by Ireland

    26 March 2019State or organisation: IrelandForum: GGE LAWS 2019

    The conduct of legal reviews of new weapons, means and methods of war under article 36 of [AP I] is important for ensuring that the development, deployment and use of new weapons systems and new means and methods of warfare comply with international law. As …

2006

  1. IHL and ERW: Response from Ireland

    10 February 2006State or organisation: IrelandForum: WG ERW

    16. All Defence Forces personnel engaged in weapons procurement and formulation of militarydoctrine have access to military legal advice.