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.
2023
Statement by Pakistan
We would also like to appreciate your deft handling of this body and your introduction under this topic, which we found very useful. Some very pertinent questions were raised by you. … [W]e can go with you, when you characterise our discussions under this topic, …
Proposal for an international legal instrument on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems
23. … National regulations and responses alone such as national weapons reviews are useful but not sufficient. The GGE is not the platform to confer legitimacy on national measures, which cannot be verified.