CYIL 2011

UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES AND LAW OF ARMED CONFLICT IMPLICATIONS Such observations are mainly established on assessment of capabilities and modes of employment of current UAVs types conducting combat operations, which are still only remotely-controlled machines and where a role of operator – person (ultimately responsible and accountable for it’s operation) is preserved. Thus, activities surrounding such types of UAVs operational engagement generally do not differ from firing a long distance rocket from manned aircraft etc. Until a certain degree of autonomy of UAVs engaging in combat consisting for example in control over battlefield, application of principle of distinction will be upheld to a certain level of “independency” in decision making process, then the existing sets of LOAC principles and rules seem to represent satisfactory regulatory context. However, it might not last too long when this thin line will be crossed and the existing rules might not sufficiently cover UAVs whole combat engagement implications. Such period then will be the right opportunity to introduce adequate set of rules especially focusing on setting exact limits of accountability for its use.

157