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.
8 positions Panama (remove filter)
2026
Statement by Panama
On this paragraph, having heard the comments of other delegations, I think that you've done a titanic effort to achieve a balance in the chapeau and in the subparagraphs. Now we've heard the argument that if the obligations to carry out legal reviews and this …
REAIM Pathways to Action
… 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 …
2024
Submission by Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Kazakhstan, Nigeria, Panama, Peru, the Philippines, Sierra Leone and State of Palestine to the Secretary-General
The draft Protocol includes a preamble and eight (8) articles: (1) General Provisions, (2) Characterization, (3) Prohibitions, (4) Regulations, (5) Review of Weapons, (6) Risk Mitigation, (7) Compliance, and (8) Consultations of High Contracting Parties …. [Annex: CCW/GGE.1/2023/WP.6]
2023
Draft Protocol on Autonomous Weapon Systems (Protocol VI)
Article 5: Review of Weapons Sec. 1: Each High Contracting Party shall ensure that weapon systems under development or modification which changes the effects or use of existing weapon systems, including as a result of self-learning processes, must be reviewed to ensure compliance with international …
2022
Draft Protocol VI
Article 4: Review of Weapons Sec 1: Each High Contracting Party shall ensure that weapon systems under development or modification which changes the effects or use of existing weapon systems, including as a result of self-learning process, must be reviewed to ensure compliance with international …
Roadmap Towards a New Protocol on Autonomous Weapons Systems
4. The current cycle of GGE shall aim to formally recognize the common elements that have arisen through constructive engagement among delegations throughout the CCW discussions on autonomous weapon systems (AWS), particularly in the last GGE cycle. These common elements include recognizing: … (h) the …
Working paper
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
Joint Working Paper
9. … Our delegations are of the view that stronger focus should be given to the following principles, which should be the elements of a normative framework on LAWS: (j) … States should be transparent regarding all aspects of the development of their weapons systems, …