Campaign to Stop Killer Robot
>>They could be prone to killing people unlawfully because the weapons could not be programmed to handle every situation. According to roboticists, there is little prospect that fully autonomous weapon will ever possess human qualities, such as judgment, that facilitate compliance with the right to life in unforeseen situations.
>>They would also undermine human dignity, as inanimate machines could not understand or respect the value of life, yet they would have the power to determine when to take it away.
>>There may be less meaningful accountability for the actions of a fully autonomous weapon as there would be legal and practical obstacles to holding anyone – superior officer, programmer, or manufacturer – responsible for a robot’s actions. Both criminal and civil law are ill suited to the task.
Plus, in this meeting, some nations mentioned about the crisis of fully autonomous weapons like this…
- Argentina said that it is concerned about the normalisation of conflict and an arms race that could be triggered by these weapons
- Brazil stated that robots should not make lethal decisions.
- Cuba supported the recommendation for a moratorium
- Indonesia said that LARs had
- Pakistan stated that a similar approach to that of blinding lasers – a pre-emptive ban treaty – is also needed in response to LARs as well
- Morocco said that giving de facto the right to kill human beings to machines needs to be examined for human rights requirements
- Mexico said that legal accountability is needed for LARs, and regulation is needed
- Sierra Leone raised questions over accountability and responsibility and called for a moratorium
- Switzerland said that in no circumstances should states delegate the use of lethal force