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.
2016
Opening Statement by the Netherlands
Please allow me, to summarize explain in summary the Dutch position: […] 9. Autonomous weapon systems need to remain under meaningful human control. Therefore it is important that when procuring autonomous weapons, the government should ensure that (1). the concept of morally responsible engineering is …
Statement by the Netherlands
The Netherlands believes that, in assessing whether autonomous weapon systems are under meaningful human control, there is an important role for the Article 36 procedure of the First Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions. Article 36 obliges States Parties to determine whether new means and …