AUTONOMOUS WEAPON SYSTEMS FROM LEGAL AND ETHICAL PERSPECTIVES: GAPS IN INTERNATIONAL LAW

The emergence of Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems (LAWS) has transformed the landscape of modern warfare, raising complex legal, ethical, and technological questions. Defined by their capacity to select and engage targets without direct human control, LAWS differ significantly from semi-autonomous systems that require human input at critical stages. This typological distinction is foundational, as full autonomy challenges traditional norms of accountability and moral agency. Driven by advances in artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, and robotics, autonomous systems are increasingly capable of performing battlefield tasks with minimal human intervention. While offering operational advantages such as speed and precision, these technologies risk delegating life-and-death decisions to algorithms, undermining human dignity and complicating post hoc legal accountability. International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and human rights norms— particularly the principles of distinction, proportionality, and necessity—struggle to keep pace with these developments, leading to a significant normative gap. The ethical implications are equally profound. Delegating lethal authority to machines threatens core values of moral responsibility and human dignity, while also creating an “accountability gap” in determining legal liability. Concerns about AI bias, targeting errors, and potential human rights violations further underscore the urgency for robust regulation. This study proposes a dual-track approach to address these challenges: (1) the adoption of a binding international treaty that prohibits fully autonomous weapons and ensures meaningful human control, and (2) the establishment of global ethical standards, transparency protocols, and oversight mechanisms. A precautionary, human-centric model is advocated, emphasizing moratoria on deployment, inclusive policymaking, and strengthened verification systems. The study combines legal and ethical analysis, empirical case studies, and policy evaluation to contribute to the formulation of coherent and enforceable norms. Ultimately, the responsible governance of LAWS requires a comprehensive framework that bridges legal doctrine, ethical principles, and technological realities.