AI-Based Autonomous Weapons and Individual Criminal Responsibility Under the Rome Statute

Objective: international law obligates states to prosecute those who have violated laws in armed conflicts, particularly when the international community now has International Criminal Court (ICC).

That is why the aim of the paper is to discover the responsibility for the crimes made with the use of AI-based autonomous vehicles in accordance with the provisions of the Rome Statute of the ICC.

Methods: doctrinal analysis allowed to research the positions of experts on the responsibility for the crimes made with the use of AI-based autonomous vehicles in accordance with the provisions of the Rome Statute of the ICC.  

Results: this paper argues that the ICC can only exercise jurisdiction over natural persons who allegedly have committed the crimes under its jurisdiction, as compared to autonomous weapons. This paper argues that the persons who facilitate the commission of the alleged crimes are highly likely to be criminally responsible for providing means for the alleged crimes to be committed by AI-based autonomous weapons under Article 25(3)(c) of the Rome Statute and concludes that the Rome Statute provides a solution even to AI-based autonomous weapons.

Scientific novelty: this paper addresses to the highly relevant issues of the responsibility for the crimes made with the use of AI-based autonomous vehicles in accordance with the provisions of the Rome Statute of the ICC.

Practical significance: the results achieved in the paper can be used in regulation design for AI-based autonomous weapons. It can also be used as a basis for the future research in the sphere of liability of AI-based autonomous weapons and AI in general

1. Ambos, K. (2016). Article 25: Individual Criminal Responsibility. In O. Triffterer, & K. Ambos (Eds.), The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary (3rd ed.). Nomos.

2. Amoroso, D., & Tamburrini, G. (2021). In Search of the ‘Human Element’: International Debates on Regulating Autonomous Weapons Systems. The International Spectator, 56(1), 20–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/03932729.2020.1864995

3. Bantekas, I. (2022). Punishment in Warfare and the Application of Law. In Principles of Direct and Superior Responsibility in International Humanitarian Law (pp. 1–37). Manchester UP.

4. Bartneck, C., Lütge, C., Wagner, A., & Welsh, S. (2021). Military Uses of AI BT. In An Introduction to Ethics in Robotics and AI (pp. 93–99). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51110-4_11

5. Burgess, A. (2017). The Executive Guide to Artificial Intelligence: How to Identify and Implement Applications for AI in Your Organization. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63820-1

6. Ekelhof, M. A. (2017). Complications of a Common Language: Why It Is So Hard to Talk About Autonomous Weapons. Journal of Conflict and Security Law, 22(2), 311–331. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcsl/krw029

7. Fennell, J. (2019). Fighting the People’s War: The British and Commonwealth Armies and the Second World War. CUP. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139380881

8. Gunawan, Y., Anggriawan, M. H. A. R., & Putro, T. A. (2022). Command Responsibility of Autonomous weapons under International Humanitarian Law. Cogent Social Sciences, 8(1), 2139906. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2022.2139906

9. Hareth, B., & Evans, N. G. (2023). Make Them Rare or Make Them Care. In D. Schoeni & T. Vestner (Eds.), Ethical Dilemmas in the Global Defense Industry (pp. 217–236). OUP.

10. Hassan, F. M., & Osman, N. D. (2019). The Obligation to Prosecute Heads of State Under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and Customary International Law: The African And United States’ Perspectives. MJSL, 7(1), 33–56. https://doi.org/10.33102/mjsl.v7i1.112

11. Horowitz, M. C. (2019). When Speed Kills: Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, Deterrence and Stability. Journal of Strategic Studies, 42(6), 764–788. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2019.1621174

12. Human Rights Watch. (2020). Stop Killer Robots: Country Positions on Banning Fully Autonomous Weapons and Retaining Human Control.

13. Javdani, S., Admoni, H., Srinivasa, S. P. S. S., & Bagnell, J. A. (2018). Shared Autonomy via Hindsight Optimization for Teleoperation and Teaming. International Journal of Robotics Research, 37(7), 717–742. https://doi.org/10.1177/0278364918776060

14. Kalmanovitz, P. (2022). Can Criminal Organizations Be Non-State Parties to Armed Conflict? In International Review of the Red Cross (pp. 1–19). ICRC, CUP. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1816383122000510

15. Kohama, S. (2019). Territorial Acquisition, Commitment, and Recurrent War. International Relations of the AsiaPacific, 19(2), 269–295. https://doi.org/10.1093/irap/lcy001

16. Krishnan, A. (2009). Automating War: The Need for Regulation. Contemporary Security Policy, 30(1), 172–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260902760397

17. Lawand, K. (2006). Reviewing the legality of new weapons, means and methods of warfare. International Review of the Red Cross, 88, 925–930. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1816383107000884

18. Lokhorst, G.-J., & Hoven, J. van den. (2012). Responsibility for military robots. In P. Lin, K. Abney, & G. A. Bekey (Eds.), Robot Ethics: The Ethics and Social Implications of Robotics (pp. 145–156). MIT Press.

19. Malle, B. F., Magar, S. T., & Scheutz, M. (2019). AI in the Sky: How People Morally Evaluate Human and Machine Decisions in a Lethal Strike Dilemma. In M. I. A. Ferreira, J. S. Sequeira, G. S. Virk, M. O. Tokhi, & E. E. Kadar (Eds.), Robotics and Well-being (pp. 111–133). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12524-0_11

20. McFarland, T., & McCormack, T. (2014). Mind the Gap: Can Developers of Autonomous Weapon Systems be Liable for War Crimes?, Internatoinal Law Studies, 90, 350–362.

21. Payne, K. (2021). I, Warbot: The Dawn of Artificially Intelligent Conflict. OUP.

22. Pella V. (1950).Towards an International Criminal Court. American Journal of International Law, 44(1), 38–49.

23. Schabas,William A. (2009). International Crimes. In D. Armstrong (Ed.), Routledge Handbook of International Law. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203884621

24. Totaro, D. L. (2023). Machine or Robot? Thoughts on the Legal Notion of Autonomy in the Context of Self-Driving Vehicles and Intelligent Machines. European Business Law Review, 34(1), 99–114.