Positions of States and Organisations

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.

2026

  1. Statement by Spain

    2 September 2026State or organisation: SpainForum: GGE LAWS 2026

    Now, that being said, let's make the following comments. On paragraph 39(a) and the first sentence on legal reviews, the inclusion of study, development, acquisition or adoption. Now, we know that a good number of delegations have made this request time and again relating to …

  2. REAIM Pathways to Action

    5 February 2026State or organisation: ArmeniaState or organisation: AustriaState or organisation: BelgiumState or organisation: CanadaState or organisation: ChileState or organisation: CyprusState or organisation: CzechiaState or organisation: DenmarkState or organisation: FinlandState or organisation: FranceState or organisation: GeorgiaState or organisation: GermanyState or organisation: GhanaState or organisation: GreeceState or organisation: HungaryState or organisation: IcelandState or organisation: IrelandState or organisation: ItalyState or organisation: LuxembourgState or organisation: MoroccoState or organisation: NetherlandsState or organisation: NorwayState or organisation: PakistanState or organisation: PanamaState or organisation: PhilippinesState or organisation: PortugalState or organisation: Republic of KoreaState or organisation: RomaniaState or organisation: SingaporeState or organisation: SpainState or organisation: SwedenState or organisation: SwitzerlandState or organisation: TürkiyeState or organisation: UkraineState or organisation: United KingdomForum: REAIM

    … 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 …

2022

  1. Working Paper

    9 August 2022State or organisation: FinlandState or organisation: FranceState or organisation: GermanyState or organisation: NetherlandsState or organisation: NorwayState or organisation: SpainState or organisation: SwedenForum: GGE LAWS 2022

    B. In order to operationalize the two-tier approach, the HCP should: (b) Commit to only develop, produce, acquire, modify, deploy or use lethal weapons systems featuring autonomy when the following provisions are fulfilled: i. compliance with international law is ensured when studying, acquiring, adopting or …

2021

  1. Answers by Spain to the Guiding Questions

    September 2021State or organisation: SpainForum: GGE LAWS 2021

    Which decisions, activities, and processes across the life-cycle of a weapons system would collectivelycontribute towards and enable appropriate human-machine interaction/human control/human judgment?What would be the interaction between these various decisions, activities, and processes and how would theyvary based on the operational context and the characteristics …

  2. Written contribution of Spain on possible consensus recommendations

    2021State or organisation: SpainForum: GGE LAWS 2021

    States should assess, through legal reviews, whether human involvement in the new system would violate IHL principles. In case a legal review identifies a use that might be problematic, doctrine and training should be drafted and implemented in such a way that they allow the …

2020

  1. National Commentary by Spain

    6 July 2020State or organisation: SpainForum: GGE LAWS 2020

    To start with, States should assess, through legal reviews of new weapons and new methods of warfare, whether the level of human involvement in the new system would violate IHL. In case a legal review identifies a use that might be problematic, doctrine and training …