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 Sierra Leone (remove filter)
2025
Statement by Sierra Leone
As a cosponsor of Draft Protocol VI, Sierra Leone notes the significant convergence between that protocol and the rolling text, particularly regarding the application of international humanitarian law, the need for human control, prohibitions on certain systems, weapons reviews, human responsibility and risk mitigation.
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, …
2016
Statement by Sierra Leone
We have heard conflicting views as to whether LAWS could be in conformity with IHL. My delegation trusts that all States would like to operate within the provisions of International Humanitarian Law and would take steps to respect Article 36 of the Additional Protocol 1 …