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.
40 positions GGE LAWS 2023 (remove filter)
2023 (continued)
Statement by the United Kingdom (2nd intervention)
Rather than trying to prevent you asked him some more challenging questions, actually I want to remind us of the homework you presented this week last night. And I want to perhaps now take the opportunity to answer or provide a UK response to one …
Statement by the United States (1st intervention)
We appreciate the inclusion of legal reviews as a topic on your indicative timetable. The GGE’s mandate, of course, is to consider proposals and to elaborate by consensus possible measures. We believe that legal reviews are a particularly important measure in the context of [AWS] …
Statement by the United States (2nd intervention)
This is, like our Swedish colleague, in response to your questions. Regarding the first question, my delegation agrees with what seems to be the consensus that legal reviews do not ensure compliance but are a very important measure. Regarding the second question, we do see …
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.
Concept of activities of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation in the development and use of weapons systems
3. … Adherence to the basic principles of IHL: distinction, proportionality, humanitarian considerations and military necessity should be mandatory, as well as legal review in the study, development, acquisition or adoption of new weapon types. …
Draft articles on autonomous weapon systems
Article 1: Preventing Autonomous Weapon Systems That, By Their Nature, Are Incapable of Use in Accordance With IHL IHL prohibits the use of an autonomous weapon system if it is of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering, if it is inherently indiscriminate, …
Proposal for the normative and operational framework on autonomous weapons systems
If an AWS’ functioning is opaque, then humans responsible for the application of IHL rules — both persons entrusted with the legal review of an AWS and persons responsible for compliance with IHL during its use — could not reasonably determine its lawfulness under IHL …
Revised Working Paper
4. It is also a requirement throughout research, development, acquisition and use of [AWS] to constantly review and reassess any possible changes and modifications in the system’s functioning with regard to fulfilment of the conditions listed above. This should include technical aspects such as ‘machine …
Statement by the United Kingdom
We must also articulate the characteristics of these systems which may have positive or negative implications for compliance with IHL, and their impact upon activities throughout the life cycle of a weapon system, such as those elements that you mentioned in your introduction Mr Chair …
2014
Statement by Sweden
Before the deployment of any new weapon system, including one that is autonomous, there is an obligation to conduct a review of the means and methods of warfare in accordance with Article 36 of Additional Protocol I.