Side event shines a light on the benefits of voluntary information sharing on new weapons, means and methods of warfare

Building on an event earlier in the year that explored the importance of legal reviews of new weapons, means and methods of warfare, on 17 October the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA) hosted speakers from the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) to shine a light on the role that voluntary exchanges of information could play in legal reviews.

In her opening remarks, Ms. Izumi Nakamitsu, Under-Secretary-General and High Representative for Disarmament Affairs, underscored the importance of legal reviews in ensuring that all weapons, means and methods of warfare employed by a State be used in accordance with international law, particularly international humanitarian law. Voluntary exchanges of information on such reviews could increase transparency and confidence, allowing States to optimize their own approaches and serve as a reference to States considering to conducting legal reviews, she said.

Robert in den Bosch, Permanent Representative of the Kingdom of the Netherlands to the Conference on Disarmament, outlined the Kingdom of the Netherlands’ approach to legal reviews. Ambassador in den Bosch explained the advantages of conducting legal reviews for the Netherlands and indicated: a) it increased transparency, enhanced accountability and legitimacy and allowed for public support for defence procurement; b) it contributed to reliability, since manufacturers build products based on the results of and parameters identified in State conducted legal reviews; and c) it ensured predictability of weapons, means and methods of warfare. It is noteworthy that legal reviews were discussed at the Group of Governmental Experts (GGE) on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems (LAWS) in the context of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, which the Ambassador chairs.

Mr. Laurent Gisel, Head of the Arms & Conduct of Hostilities Unit at the ICRC, provided a brief background on legal reviews, the obligation from which these are derived as contained in article 36 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions. This obligation applies not only when States ‘deploy’ but also when they ‘acquire’ or ‘adapt’ a new weapon, means or methods of warfare. While High Contracting Parties to the Additional Protocol have a specific obligation to conduct legal reviews, all States have an interest in assessing the legality of their weapons flowing from the duty to ensure adherence to international humanitarian law. High Contracting Parties to Additional Protocol I are already obliged by its article 84 to share laws and regulations which they may adopt to ensure the  application of the Protocol.

Mr. Gisel called for international cooperation, including investment and financial support to countries that lack the means to conduct legal reviews. Both the International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and the UN Secretary-General have encouraged States to exchange information on review processes. Importantly, in order for legal reviews of weapons, means and methods of warfare based on new and emerging technologies [CG2] to be useful, substantive discussions, including internationally, were necessary to establish certain common understandings about their compatibility with international law. This, she concluded, was a prerequisite for meaningful legal reviews.

Mr. Vincent Boulanin, Director of the Governance of Artificial Intelligence Programme at SIPRI, referred to two SIPRI publications (a compendium on Article 36 reviews and a paper entitled “Article 36 reviews: Dealing with the challenges posed by emerging technologies” ) and highlighted three key challenges: a) defining the conceptual understandings of what is covered by legal reviews, including when and how to conduct such reviews; b)  ensuring technical expertise amongst the reviewers; and c) designing new methods for assessing new and emerging technologies, such as empirical tests and evaluations, in order to test the reliability of the system as well as second and third order effects. He underlined that the obligation to conduct legal reviews applied not only to weapons, since the reference to means and methods of warfare made the scope broader and could also encompass cyber operations and decision-support systems utilizing artificial intelligence.

During the interactive discussion, attendees noted that legal reviews constituted a confidence-building measure. They also provided information on expert meetings that had been conducted on the question of legal reviews in the context of LAWS. The role of industry was also discussed.

Attendees shared information on activities related to legal reviews, such as the expert meetings on the legal review of autonomous weapons systems convened by Australia in Sydney in 2023 and 2024. Australia had also held side events on the margins of the GGE LAWS and, together with France, during the Responsible Artificial Intelligence in the Military Domain (REAIM) Summit in Seoul in September 2024. France had co-hosted a side-event with Japan and Brazil during the August session of the GGE on LAWS this year, featuring compliance with international humanitarian law, best practices, and approaches to conducting legal reviews in national processes and how such processes might apply to autonomous weapons systems. Attendees noted that this type of activities and others provided a platform to exchange information, raise awareness and foster international dialogue on legal reviews.

In closing, Ms. Beyza Unal, Head of the Science, Technology and International Security Unit at the Office for Disarmament Affairs, gave an update on the Office’s project to create a portal for information sharing on legal reviews, which is expected to become operational in 2025.