Symposium on the CCW GGE LAWS: The End of the Beginning – An Introduction

[Jessica Dorsey is an Assistant Professor of International Law at Utrecht University School of Law and Managing Editor of Opinio Juris. Rain Liivoja is a Professor at the University of Queensland Law School, and a Director of the Asia-Pacific Institute for Law and Security. Netta Goussac is an Associate Senior Researcher at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute and Associate Partner at Lexbridge. Sally Longworth is Senior Lecturer in Public International Law at Stockholm University and Researcher at the Swedish Defence Research Agency (FOI). Anna Andersson is a Senior Researcher at the Swedish Defence Research Agency (FOI). The views expressed in this post are only attributable to the authors and do not represent the views or position of any government or other entity.]

Discussions about the regulation of autonomous weapon systems have been ongoing under the auspices of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) for over a decade. In the early morning hours of Saturday, 5 September 2026, the Group of Government Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems (GGE LAWS) reached consensus on a report that completes its 2024–2026 mandate. Importantly, the report contains, in paragraphs 25–44, ‘a set of elements of an instrument, without prejudging its nature, and other possible measures to address emerging technologies in the area of lethal autonomous weapon systems’. This Opinio Juris symposium offers a series of pieces analyzing these elements.

Before turning to the analysis of the elements, it is worth pausing to recognize the achievement that the group’s report represents. In the current geopolitical climate, amid growing polarization and complex challenges to multilateralism, the CCW’s 128 States Parties (which includes major military powers) were able to bring a consensus-based report across the finish line. Moreover, at least 70 of those States are ready and willing to move toward negotiations on a legally binding instrument. This is no small feat. The report is an achievement in itself, reflecting the efforts of the Chair, Ambassador Robert in den Bosch of the Netherlands, and his team guiding the process over the last three years. 

This achievement, however, should not cause us to lose sight of the concerns with the content of the report, and its contribution to the international policy debate on autonomous weapons. The text has substantive shortcomings, some of which are demonstrated throughout our symposium, and some have already been reflected here, here, here and here.

In any event, the adopted elements are an artefact. They are a repository of States’ views, and will be treated by States as such. They are as much a record of what was agreed as what was not agreed. The elements are likely to form the basis of any future multilateral discussion or negotiation regarding autonomous weapons in any format or forum.

All contributors to this symposium have participated in the work of the GGE and can thus offer first-hand observations on the context in which the elements were adopted. These contributions seek to assist States and other participants in the policy debate in making sense of the elements by explaining, and reflecting on, the report.

First, Rain Liivoja discusses the characterization of LAWS as contained in paragraph 25 of the report. Sally Longworth then analyses how closely the elements that follow align with existing international humanitarian law (paragraphs 26 to 33). Next, Anna Andersson traces the evolution of the human element across the GGE discussion, and examines how the elements contained in paragraphs 34 to 35 were iterated. Netta Goussac then provides an analysis of the “lifecycle” measures (paragraphs 36 to 39). Following that, Jessica Dorsey traces the trajectory of responsibility and accountability from the first rolling text in July 2024 to the GGE’s report (paragraphs 40 to 43) and finally, Jeroen van den Boogaard concludes the symposium by reflecting on our analyses and aspects of the process over the past three years.

The symposium further aims to give insight into the final process of agreement in the September 2026 session of the GGE, a marathon effort with many substantive amendments being proposed right up to the very end. The deliberations included moments when it looked like consensus might not be reached. Contrary to common fears, this was not because militarily powerful States had an interest in not adopting anything. Rather, the flexibility of States that were aiming for a strong set of elements was being tested by proposals that sought to dilute the text. The decision to hold much of these discussions in informal sessions may have been motivated by a desire to maximise usable time and facilitate consensus on the text. But it also had practical implications for delegations that had to work long hours in English without the benefit of interpretation, and without the support of signatory and observer States, let alone non-state delegations.

The final effort in reaching agreement reflects a strong interest in continuing these discussions in the CCW, including at least 70 States that are ready and willing to move toward negotiations on a legally binding instrument within the CCW. It also highlights the narrow substantive agreement among states on critical issues such as control and human judgment. This portends how much work there may be in reaching future agreement on the law applicable in the development and use of LAWS. At the same time, it cannot be denied that the set of elements marks significant progress in the process of the GGE from the 2019 Guiding Principles and the 2023 report, which were earlier milestones. 

To mark over a decade of discussions, debates and diplomatic negotiations on LAWS, we’ve also put together a lighthearted playlist to accompany this series and commemorate the journey thus far. As the Chair remarked during the formal session of September 2026, the GGE’s report represents the “end of the beginning.” We invite readers to engage with these analyses, challenge our arguments and contribute to the ongoing conversation about the future of LAWS regulation. As the international community turns its attention toward the CCW’s Seventh Review Conference (16-20 November 2026) and considers the prospects for developing a legally binding instrument, we hope this symposium proves useful for the continuing discussions that lie ahead. The beginning may be over, but the work is far from done.