Przejdź do głównego menu Przejdź do sekcji głównej Przejdź do stopki
logo czasopisma

Artykuły

Nr 3 (2024): Prawo i Więź Nr 3 (50) 2024

Development and Deployment of Autonomous Weapon Systems: Comprehensive Analysis of International Humanitarian Law

DOI
https://doi.org/10.36128/PRIW.VI50.774
Przesłane
27 października 2023
Opublikowane
21.08.2024 — zaktualizowane 22.08.2024
Wersje

Abstrakt

This paper addresses the problem of the need to determine the legality of autonomous weapon systems (AWS) under international humanitarian law (IHL), focusing on the two targeting and weapons laws. This study emphasizes the need not to confuse these two laws in the analysis. The paper aims to clarify whether AWS could be considered illegal under IHL, taking into account the principles of distinction, proportionality, and precaution. The research methodology includes an analysis of the relevant provisions of IHL and customary humanitarian law. The research design includes an examination of the potential of AWS to cause unnecessary injury or suffering and their classification as indiscriminate weapons. The paper concludes that while AWS posses autonomous decision-making capabilities, human oversight is required to prevent excessive harm.

Bibliografia

  1. A Guide to the Legal Review of New Weapons, Means and Methods of Warfare: Measures to Implement Article 36 of Additional Protocol I of 1977, January 2006” IRRC, No. 864 (2006).
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  2. Abi-Saab Georges, The Specificities of Humanitarian Law (1984).
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  3. Anderson Kenneth, Reisner Daniel, Waxman Matthew C., „Adapting the Law of Armed Conflict to Autonomous Weapon Systems” International Law Studies, (2014): 386-411.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  4. Asaro Peter, „Jus Nascendi. Robotic Weapons and the Martens Clause”, [in:] Robot Law, ed. Michael A. Froomkin, Ryan Calo, Ian Kerr, Edward Elgar. 367-386. Cheltenham, 2016. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781783476732.00024.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  5. Azaria Asaph, Asma Ghandeharioun, Akane Sano, Rosalind Picard, Natasha Jaques, Sara Taylor, Predicting Students’ Happiness from Physiology, Phone, Mobility, and Behavioral Data. International Conference on Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction and workshops: [proceedings]. ACII (Conference), September 2015. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28515966/.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  6. Bitar Mohammad Chakka Benarji, „Drone Attacks During Armed Conflict: Quest for Legality and Regulation” International Journal of Intellectual Property Management, No. ¾ (2023): 97-411.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  7. Boulanin Vincent, Neil Davison, Netta Goussac, Moa Peldán Carlsson, Limits on Autonomy in Weapon Systems: Identifying Practical elements of Human Control. 2020.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  8. Brenneke Matthias, „Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems and their Compatibility with International Humanitarian Law: a Primer on the Debate” Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law, Vol. XXI (2020): 59-98.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  9. Cannizzaro Enzo, Proportionality in the Law of Armed Conflict. 2014.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  10. Carpanelli Elena, „General Principles of International Law: Struggling with a Slippery Concept”, [in:] General Principles of Law-The Role of the Judiciary. 125-143. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2015.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  11. Cassese Antonio, The Martens Clause: Half a Loaf or Simply Pie in the Sky?”, [in:] The Development and Principles of International Humanitarian Law. 373-402. London: Routledge, 2017.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  12. Choi Charles Q., Mood-Detecting Sensor Could Help Machines Respond to Emotions” IEEE Spectrum, 24 June 24 2021. https://spectrum.ieee.org/mooddetecting-sensor-could-help-machines-respond-to-emotions.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  13. Coker Christopher, „On Banning Autonomous Weapon Systems: Human Rights, Automation and the Dehumanization of Lethal Decision Making” Future Wars, (2015): 57-60.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  14. Coupland Robin M., Review of the Legality of Weapons: a New Approach” International Review of the Red Cross, No. 835 (1999): 583-592.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  15. Crawford Emily, „The Principle of Distinction and Remote Warfare”, [in:] Research Handbook on Remote Warfare. 50-78. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2017.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  16. Crootof Rebecca, „The Killer Robots Are Here: Legal and Policy Implications” Cardozo Law Review, No. 5 (2015): 1837-1916.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  17. Dinniss Heather Harrison, Cyber Warfare and the Laws of War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  18. Dinstein Yoram, Discussion: Reasonable Military Commanders and Reasonable Civilians. Legal and Ethical Lessons of NATO’s Kosovo Campaign. Newport: Naval War College, 2002.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  19. Drew James, „USAF’s Small UAS Roadmap Calls for Swarming «kamikaze» Drones” Flight Global, 10 December 2019. https://www.flightglobal.com/civil-uavs/usafs-small-uas-roadmap-calls-for-swarming-kamikaze-drones/120493.article.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  20. Egeland Kjølv, „Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems Under International Humanitarian Law” Nordic Journal of International Law, No. 2 (2016): 89-118.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  21. Expert Meeting: Autonomous Weapon System: Technological, Military, Legal, and Humanitarian Aspects” ICRC, (2014).
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  22. Ford Christopher M., Autonomous Weapons and International Law” South Carolina Law Review, 69 (2017): 413-478.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  23. Forestier-Walker Robin, „Nagorno-Karabakh: New Weapons for an Old Conflict Spell Danger” Al Jazeera, 13 October 2020. https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2020/10/13/nagorno-karabakh-new-weapons-for-an-old-conflict-spell-danger.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  24. Haight Joel M., Vladislav Kecojevic, „Automation vs. human intervention: What is the best fit for the best performance?” Process Safety Progress, No. 1 (2005): 45-51.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  25. Handy Brian, Royal Air Force Aircraft & Weapons (DCC(RAF). Publications Belmont Press, 2007.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  26. Hardy Michael, „Pentagon Proves Air-Launched UAV Swarm Ability” C4ISRNet, 19 August 2022. https://www.c4isrnet.com/unmanned/uas/2016/03/15/pentagon-proves-air-launched-uav-swarm-ability/.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  27. Hayir Nurbanu, „Defining Weapon Systems with Autonomy: The Critical Functions in Theory and Practice” Groningen Journal of International Law, No. 2 (2022): 239-265
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  28. Henderson Ian, Patrick Keane, Joshua Liddy, „Remote and Autonomous Warfare Systems – Precautions in Attack and Individual Accountability”, [in:] Research Handbook on Remote Warfare, ed. Jens David Ohlin. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Press, 2016.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  29. Hernandez Joe, „A Military Drone with a Mind of Its Own Was Used in Combat, U.N. Says” NPR, 1 June 2021. https://www.npr.org/2021/06/01/1002196245/a-u-n-report-suggests-libya-saw-the-first-battlefield-killing-by-an-autonomous-d.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  30. Heyns Christof, „Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions” Security Issues in the Greater Middle East, (2013).
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  31. Homayounnejad Maziar, „Ensuring Fully Autonomous Weapons Systems Comply with the Rule of Distinction in Attack”, [in:] Drones and Other Unmanned Weapons Systems under International Law. 123-157. Leiden: Brill Nijhoff, 2018.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  32. Hughes Joshua G., „The Law of Armed Conflict Issues Created by Programming Automatic Target Recognition Systems Using Deep Learning Methods” Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law, Vol. XXI (2018): 99-135.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  33. Khalil Ahmad, S. Anandha Krishna Raj, „Challenges to the Principle of Distinction in Cyber Warfare Navigating International Humanitarian Law Compliance” Prawo i Więź (2024).
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  34. Khen Hilly Moodrick-Even, „Aidōs and Dikē in International Humanitarian Law: Is IHL a Legal or a Moral System?” The Monist, No. 1 (2016): 26-39.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  35. Labbé Jérémie, Pascal Daudin, „Applying the Humanitarian Principles: Reflecting on the Experience of the International Committee of the Red Cros” International Review of the Red Cross, No. 897-898 (2015): 183-210.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  36. Lewis Dustin A., „Three Pathways to Secure Greater Respect for International Law Concerning War Algorithms” Harvard Law School.PILAC (2020). https://pilac.law.harvard.edu/three-pathways-to-secure-greater-respect-for-international-law-concerning-war-algorithms.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  37. Lucas Jr George R., „Automated Warfare” Stanford Law & Policy Review, 25 (2014): 317-340.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  38. McDuff Daniel J., Javier Hernandez, Sarah Gontarek, Rosalind W. Picard, „Cogcam” Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, No. 3 (2016): 4000–4004. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858247.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  39. Melzer Nils, Human Rights Implications of the Usage of Drones and Unmanned Robots in Warfare. Directorate-General for External Policies, European Parliament, 2013.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  40. Morillo Stephen, What is Military History?. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2017.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  41. „Neuron Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV) Demonstrator” Airforce Technology, 18 February 2020. https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/neuron/.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  42. Noll Gregor, „Analogy at War: Proportionality, Equality and the Law of Targeting” Netherlands Yearbook of International Law, 43 (2012): 205-230.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  43. O’Connell Mary Ellen, „Banning Autonomous Killing: The Legal and Ethical Requirement that Humans Make Near-time Lethal Decisions”, [in:] The American Way of Bombing: How Legal and Ethical Norms Change. 224-236. Cornell: Cornell University Press, 2014.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  44. Reeves Shane, William Johnson, „Autonomous Weapons: Are You Sure These Are Killer Robots? Can We Talk About It?” The Army Lawyer, (2014).
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  45. Rešlová Petra, Meaningful Human Control in Autonomous Weapons (2023).
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  46. Robertson Horace B., „The Principle of the Military Objective in the Law of Armed Conflict”, [in:] The Development and Principles of International Humanitarian Law. 531-557. London: Routledge, 2017.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  47. Ruth A. David, Paul Nielsen, „Defense Science Board Summer Study on Autonomy. Washington: Defense Technical Information Center, 2016.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  48. Sassoli Marco, „Autonomous Weapons and International Humanitarian Law: Advantages, Open Technical Questions and Legal Issues to be Clarified” International Law Studies, No. 1 (2014):
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  49. Scharre Paul, Michael C. Horowitz, „Autonomy in Weapon Systems” Center for a New American Security Working Paper, (2015).
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  50. Schmitt Michael N., „Autonomous Weapon Systems and International Humanitarian Law: a Reply to the Critics” Harvard National Security Journal Feature (2012).
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  51. Schmitt Michael N., „Out of the Loop: Autonomous Weapon Systems and the Law of Armed Conflict” Harvard National Security Journal, 4 (2012): 321-
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  52. Schmitt Michael N., „Targeting and Humanitarian Law: Current Issues” Israel Yearbook on Human Rights, Vol. XXXIV (2004): 59-104.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  53. Sharkey Amanda, „Autonomous Weapons Systems, Killer Robots and Human Dignity” Ethics and Information Technology, No. 2 (2019): 75-87.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  54. Sparrow Robert, Twenty Seconds to Comply: Autonomous Weapon Systems and the Recognition of Surrender” International Law Studies, No. 1 (2015): 699-728.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  55. „STM Kargu” Smartencyclopedia, 4 January 2023. https://smartencyclopedia.org/content/stm-kargu/.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  56. Suchman Lucy, „Algorithmic Warfare and the Reinvention of Accuracy” Critical Studies on Security, No. 2 (2020): 175-187. https://doi.org/10.1080/21624887.2020.1760587.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  57. Surabhi Ankita, From „Killer Robots” to Autonomous Weapons Systems (AWS), 2019.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  58. Taddeo Mariarosaria, Alexander Blanchard, „A Comparative Analysis of the Definitions of Autonomous Weapons”, [in:] The 2022 Yearbook of the Digital Governance Research Group. 57-79. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2023.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  59. Tattersall Alec, Damian Copeland, Reviewing autonomous cyber capabilities. 2021.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  60. Thurnher Jeffrey S., „Means and Methods of the Future: Autonomous Systems”, [in:] Targeting: the Challenges of Modern Warfare. 186-187. The Hague: TMC Asser Press, 2015.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  61. Thurnher Jeffrey S., Feasible Precautions in Attack and Autonomous Weapons”, [in:] Dehumanization of Warfare: Legal Implications of New Weapon Technologies. 99-117. Berlin-Heidelberg: Springer Verlag, 2018.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  62. Toscano Christopher, „«Friends of Humans»: An Argument for Developing Autonomous Weapons Systems” Journal of National Security Law & Policy, No. 1 (2015): 189-246.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  63. Turns David, „Weapons in the ICRC Study on Customary International Humanitarian Law” Journal of Conflict & Security Law, No. 2 (2006): 201-237.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  64. Van Den Boogaard Jeroen, „Proportionality and Autonomous Weapons Systems” Journal of International Humanitarian Legal Studies, No. 2 (2015): 247-283.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  65. Van Den Boogaard, Jeroen C., „Fighting by the Principles: Principles as a Aource of International Humanitarian Law”, [w:] Mariëlle Matthee, ‎Brigit Toebes, ‎Marcel Bru, Armed Conflict and International Law: In Search of the Human Face: Liber Amicorum in Memory of Avril McDonald. 3-31. The Hague: Springer, 2013.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  66. Wagner Markus, „Autonomy in the Battlespace: Independently Operating Weapon Systems and the Law of Armed Conflict”, [in:] International Humanitarian Law and the Changing Technology of War. 99-122. Leiden: Brill Nijhoff, 2013.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  67. Weber Jutta, Lucy Suchman, „Human–Machine Autonomies”, [in:] Autonomous Weapons Systems: Law, Ethics, Policy, ed. Nehal Bhuta, Susanne Beck, Robin Geiβ, Hin-Yan Liu, Claus Kreβ. 75-102. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  68. Yan Liu Hin, „Categorization and Legality of Autonomous and Remote Weapons Systems” International Review of the Red Cross, No. 886 (2012).
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>
  69. Zajac Maciej, „Beyond Deadlock: Low Hanging Fruit and Strict yet Achievable Options in AWS Regulation” Journal of Ethics and Emerging Technologies, No. 2 (2022): 1-14.
    Obejrzyj w Google Scholar -->>

Pobrania

Brak dostępnych danych do wyświetlenia.