BY:

Muhammad Riffat Jan

And

Muhammad Ossama

RESEARCH PROJECT PRESENTATION FOR DEGREE OF

LL.B

TOPIC Study upon the Legality of Autonomous Weapons System in

the Light of Principles of International Humanitarian Law

RESEARCH STATEMENT

Adoption of Autonomous Weapon System is a reality and a need of time because the technology is reducing human involvement and making weapons more autonomous as ever. There is no such legal

framework under International Law to regulate States upon Autonomous weapon system, and it has to be brought in

accordance with the law of war.

CHAPTERISATION OF THESIS• Chapter 2: Overview to AWS

Lethal and Non-lethal AWS Kinds of AWS Need of AWS

• Chapter 3: Autonomous Weapon System in International law Existence of AWS Lawful and Unlawful AWS according to principle of IHL Applying Principles of IHL while conducting an attack

• Chapter 4: Accountability upon use of AWS

• Conclusion

DEFINITIONS• According to the Department of Defense of United States “a weapon systems

that, once activated, can select and engage targets without further intervention by a human operator”

• According to the Human Rights Watch “Weapons as those capable of selecting targets and deliver force without any human input or interaction”

• Autonomous weapons system is a machine which is provided with certain guidelines and it further works on such guidelines to engage and target its objective without further intervention by a human.

LETHAL AND NON-LETHAL AWS

KINDS OF AWS

NEED OF AUTONOMOUS WEAPONS SYSTEMS

LAWFUL AND UNLAWFUL AWS ACCORDING TO PRINCIPLE OF IHL

• Article 36 of the AP-1 talks about New Weapons In the study, development, acquisition or adoption of a new weapon, means or method of warfare, a High Contracting Party is under an obligation to determine whether its employment would, in some or all circumstances, be prohibited by this Protocol or by any other rule of international law applicable to the High Contracting Party.

Weapons unlawful because of it nature [Article 35(2) of AP-1]

Weapons unlawful because of its use [Article 51(4) of AP-1]

APPLYING PRINCIPLES OF IHL WHILE CONDUCTING AN ATTACK

• The Principle of Distinction [Rule 1 of CIHL]a) No attack can be directed on Civilian Object or Civilian [Article 51(2) and 52(1) of the

AP-I]

b) Direct and Indiscriminate attack [Article 51(4)(a) of AP-1]

c) Doubt [article 50(1) of AP-1]

• The Principle of Proportionality [Rule 14 of CIHL] Article 51(5)(b) and 57(2)(iii) of AP-1 It works in ex-ante not in post factum Collateral damage estimate methodology

• The Principle of Precaution [Rule 15 of CIHL] Article 57 of AP-1

ACCOUNTABILITY• Who will be held Responsible? Commander, Programmer, State,

Solider to deployed it etc.• Command Responsibility [Article 86(2) of AP-1]• On November 21, 2012 the US-DoD directive “persons who is directed or

authorize or a person who operates the AWS has to take due care in the operations and also follow all the rules of engagement, applicable treaties, laws of war and weapon safety rules, if there is non-compliance than action will be taken against such person and he/she will be held accountable.”

ETHICAL ISSUES• 21 Year boy Al-Sharif killed [Volition of Article 41 of AP-1]• Bombs drop on Civilian or Bomb drop on Medecins San Frontieres

Hospital 22 killed • Tragedy of Sonmyvillage in Vietnam

CONCLUSION