Estonia

This entry has been drafted by a member of the APILS team on the basis of publicly available materials. Its content has been neither peer reviewed nor checked for accuracy by any government official.

Estonia acceded to Additional Protocol I on 18 January 1993.

In 2018, the Minister of Defence, acting under § 3(6) the Weapons Act (the Act), made a regulation entitled Procedure for the Handling and Transfer of Weapons of the Armed Forces, their Ammunition, and Munitions (the Procedure). The Procedure addresses a range of issues, including handling, transportation, storage, maintenance, repair, and disposal of weapons, ammunition and munitions. The Procedure also requires the completion of a ‘legal analysis’ of the compatibility of weapons, ammunition and munitions used by the Estonian Defence Force (EDF) with the requirements of international law (§ 7(1)) (hereinafter, ‘legal review’). This section of the Procedure took effect on 1 January 2021.

The Minister of Defence has also issued a directive laying out rules concerning public procurement by the Ministry of Defence and agencies under its authority (the Procurement Rules). The Procurement Rules similarly require the completion of a legal review prior to the acquisition of a new weapon (§ 15.1). The Procurement Rules also establish a definition of new weapons (§ 15.2–3), and broadly outline the procedure of initiating, carrying out and approving the legal review (§ 15.4–7).

Pursuant to § 7(4) of the Procedure, the Ministry of Defence has issued a guideline for carrying out the legal review (the Guide).

Review authority

The legal review is undertaken by the EDF (Procedure § 7(2)), including with respect to weapons intended for use by other agencies under the authority of the Ministry of Defence, specifically the Estonian Defence League (voluntary national defence organisation) and the Estonian Foreign Intelligence Service (Explanatory Memorandum at 9). This is because the EDF has the largest arsenal of this type of equipment and the greatest experience in their use, coupled with the expertise on the properties of the equipment and military tactics (ibid).

The legal review is carried out by an international law expert appointed by the EDF (Guide § 2.4) and approved by the Head of Legal Affairs of the EDF’s Joint Headquarters (Guide § 2.3; Procurement Rules § 15.7).

Scope of review

The Procedure specifies in § 7(1) that any new type of weapon of the Armed Forces, ammunition or munition requires legal review. However, weapons that have been given a type approval under the Act are exempt from the legal review (Procedure § 7(3)).

The legal review requirement principally relates to military weapons, the ammunition of military weapons, and munitions, but the review of other weapons (such as non-military weapons or electric shock weapons) is not excluded (Explanatory Memorandum at 9).

The terms used in this context are defined in the Act and the Procedure as follows:

‘Weapons of the Armed Forces’ (sõjaväerelv) are weapons that are prescribed for use by agencies under the authority of Ministry of Defence for the performance of their duties (Act § 3(2)). This category comprises military weapons, firearms other than military weapons, and other weapons (Procedure § 2(1)).

‘Military weapons’ (sõjarelv) are weapons or weapons systems that are used for military purposes or that are constructed, manufactured, designated or adapted to be used for military purposes (Act § 3(3)). The Procedure provides a classification of military weapons (§ 2(2)).

‘Weapons’ are defined by reference to a list of weapon types—including firearms, pneumatic weapons, close combat weapons—each being further defined by their functioning (Act §§ 11(1) and 11).

‘Ammunition’ (laskemoon) of military weapons means a complete round, or is made up of one or more of the following components (Act § 833(21)):

  1. gunpowder or other propellant;
  2. fuse;
  3. bullet, shot or other projectile;
  4. cartridge, shell or mine casing, which may be filled with explosives, or with other chemical substances, mixtures or other components used for military purposes;
  5. ignition capsule.

‘Munition’(lahingumoon) refers to a means or material with a military purpose, other than ammunition, which contains an explosive substance, pyrotechnic substance, incendiary substance or other chemical substance capable of ignition or explosion, and which can be used or adapted to damage or destroy enemy forces and battle equipment, illuminate battle fields, create smoke screens or signals (Act § 832).

For the purposes of the legal review, however, ‘weapons’ are defined generically to encompass:

weapons, ammunition, munitions, explosives and other means, including non-lethal means and their components, which have the military purpose of injuring, damaging, destroying or otherwise rendering harmless personnel and property.

(Guide § 2.1; Procurement Rules § 15.2)

The more detailed definitions of weapons, ammunition and munitions under the Act would presumably guide the interpretation of this definition in the course of the legal review in cases of doubt. The Guide makes is clear that equipment such as technical barriers, handcuffs and means of forcibly immobilising a vehicle are not considered weapons (§ 2.1).

The Guide does not expressly address the legal review of cyber capabilities. The Act, the Procedure and the Procurement Rules are also silent on this point. However, the term ‘other means’ appears to be broad enough to encompass cyber capabilities that have the prescribed military purpose.

Novelty for the purposes of the legal review does not mean that the weapon, ammunition or munition has not been used elsewhere in the world, but rather that it has not been used by Estonia (Explanatory Memorandum at 9).

Accordingly, new weapons are defined as:

weapons which are procured, developed, manufactured or put into service for the first time by an agency within the area of government of the Ministry of Defence, or which are modified or converted in such a way that its effects of injuring, damaging, destroying, or rendering harmless are altered.

(Guide § 2.2; cf Procurement Rules § 15.3)

Standard of review

The Procedure requires ‘analysing’ compliance with ‘international law’ without specifying the rules and principles that would need to be considered as part of this review (§ 7(1)).

The Guide clarifies, first, that the review must, at a minimum, take into account treaties regulating the use of specific weapons or the use of weapons in general, as well as customary international law (§ 3.1). The review may also consider evolving norms of international law, or the principles of humanity and the dictates of public conscience (the Martens Clause) (Guide § 3.2).

The Guide requires the review to consider (§ 4.1):

  • whether international law specifically prohibits the use of the weapon in all or some circumstances;
  • if not, whether the normal of expected use of the weapon would be consistent with international law governing the use of weapons in general, including—
    • whether the weapon causes superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering;
    • whether the weapon, if it cannot be directed at a specific military target, indiscriminately affects military targets and civilians or civilian objects;
    • whether the use of the weapon would be expected to result in disproportionate collateral damage;
    • whether the weapon is designed to cause, or the use of which is likely to cause, widespread, long-term and serious damage to the natural environment.

The author of the review may also consider additional questions if this is necessary for the purpose of the review (Guide § 4.2). However, the Guide does not specify or exemplify what these additional questions might encompass.

Three points are worth highlighting in this context. First, the author of the review is given some discretion to consider issues going beyond formally applicable international law that governs the use of weapons. Second, the prohibition of inherently indiscriminate weapons is interpreted as consisting of two elements—(1) the weapon cannot be directed at a specific military target, and (2) the weapon’s use would indiscriminately affect civilians and civilian objects—with the latter being the determinative factor. Third, the review must consider the capacity of the weapons to be used in compliance with the rule of proportionality, such that some conduct of hostilities rules become part of the legal review process.

Conduct of review

The legal review must be carried out ‘during the development of a new type of military weapon, ammunition or munition, or before its acquisition or use’ (Procedure § 7(1)). The legal review begins as early as possible, in order to avoid costly and time-consuming changes to the planning and procurement process if it later emerges that the weapon cannot be used due to legal constraints (Guide § 6.1).

The review may be initiated by the Category Manager in the Estonian Centre for Defence Investment, who submits a request for the review to the EDF, or by the EDF on its own initiative (Guide § 7.1; Procurement Rules § 15.4). The review must be completed, at the latest, by the time a decision is made on the evaluation of the conformity of tenders (Guide § 6.1; Procurement Rules § 15.5). The review may be terminated without a substantive assessment if it is established that the weapon is undoubtedly lawful, or cannot be characterised as a ‘weapon’ or ‘new’ under the Guide (§ 7.2).

The author of the review must, at a minimum, obtain the following data for the review (Guide § 5.1):

technical description
of the weapons		technical specification; standard method of use and [expected or anticipated] targets;
technical functioning
of the weapon		the method of injuring, damaging, destroying or incapacitating, the accuracy and reliability of the targeting mechanism, effective range of the weapon, possibility of limiting the foreseeable effects of the weapon on the target, territory or time, risk to the population after the weapon has been used for its intended purpose (e.g. soil or air contamination, unexploded ordnance);
health effectsextent of the injury or wound in the case of the intended use of the weapon (e.g. based on wound ballistics), likely mortality among human targets in the case of the intended use of the weapon, possible anatomical injuries, disabilities or disfigurements specifically arising from the design of the weapon;
environmental effectsscientific studies on the environmental impact of the weapon, the direct or indirect environmental damage caused by the use of the weapon, the expected duration of the environmental damage caused by the weapon, the reversibility of the environmental damage and the expected time required to reverse it, the expected impact of the environmental damage on the civilian population.

The Category Manager at the EDCI ensures the collection of the data needed for the review, and also ensures that the data is clear and easy to understand (Guide §§ 5.2 and 5.4; Procurement Rules § 15.6). The author of the review may request the involvement of additional experts and the collection of additional data (e.g. from weapons tests) (Guide §§ 5.2 and 5.3).

The author of the review may use legal reviews of the same weapon prepared by other States but must reach an independent conclusion as Estonia will be responsible for the correctness of the review (Guide § 5.5).

Outcome and effect

The review could conclude (per Guide §§ 7.3) with the assessment that the normal or expected use of the weapon:

  • would be in accordance with Estonia’s obligations under international law;
  • would be contrary to Estonia’s obligations under international law at all times;
  • would run counter to Estonia’s obligations under international law in certain circumstances, and specify the conditions under which its use would comply with these obligations .

Prior to the review being approved by the Head of Legal Affairs of the EDF’s Joint Headquarters, it must be circulated for comment to the ECDI Category Manager, the EDF capability planner, and other relevant stakeholders within the Ministry of Defence, to ensure the accuracy of the description, operation and effects of the weapon (Guide § 7.4).

The review is advisory in nature, and does not affect rights and responsibility in the acquisition and use of weaponry (Guide § 8.1). However, the acquisition and adoption of a capability that is subject to the legal review requirement is prohibited without completing the review (Procedure § 8(4)). The same applies in circumstances where such a capability has been produced or modified by the EDF (Procedure §§ 50(3)(3) and 55(4)(3)).

Access restrictions may be placed on the review on the basis of the information contained therein (Guide § 8.3). The Head of Legal Affairs may share the review with other States upon the request, having weighted the national defence benefits of such sharing against any risks to security (Guide § 8.4).

National point of contact

Joint Headquarters of the Estonian Defence Forces
Juhkentali 58
15007 Tallinn
717 1155

mil.ee
mil@mil.ee

References

Key documents

Further references

Archive of positions
Published: 1 October 2025
Updated: 15 October 2025