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.
2018
Statement by Poland
Having a common characterization of LAWS, or at least, a set of the key characteristics, would be a prerequisite for seeking future policy options. Pointing to these options, Poland underlines the significance of application of “Article 36 review” as essential to determining whether the adoption …
Statement by Poland
Having regard to the ethical dimension in the first place, we also recall that the principles of distinction, proportionality and precautions in attack are the fundamental rules and principles of international humanitarian law. They reflect efforts made by the international community to introduce effective legal …
Working Paper on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems
Development and use of LAWS should remain in compliance with the international law, in particular with the [IHL] and the international human rights law. According to Article 36 of [API] states should determine the lawfulness of any new weapon or means or method of warfare …