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.

2017

  1. Weapons review mechanisms

    7 November 2017State or organisation: NetherlandsState or organisation: SwitzerlandForum: GGE LAWS 2017

    I. Summary 1. Limitations on the choice of methods and means of warfare can already be found in the oldest sources of international humanitarian law and were repeated and re-established in article 35 of the First Additional protocol (AP1). The preamble of the Convention on …

  2. Examination of various dimensions of emerging technologies in the area of lethal autonomous weapons systems

    9 October 2017State or organisation: NetherlandsForum: GGE LAWS 2017

    16. For most states, weapon reviews are compulsory based on Article 36 of [API], which obliges States Parties involved in the development or acquisition of new means and methods of warfare to determine whether they are permitted under international law. The Netherlands is of the …