Key Takeaway

The use of depleted uranium (DU) weapons is illegal under international law, and a full ban is necessary. While no explicit international treaties prohibit DU weapons, they violate principles of International Humanitarian Law (IHL), Environmental Protection Law, and Human Rights Law.

Legal Considerations

International Humanitarian Law (IHL)

• Indiscriminate Effects: DU weapons violate the principle of distinction, failing to differentiate between civilians and combatants.
• Excessive Harm: They inflict long-term health consequences and environmental damage, violating the prohibition of excessive harm to combatants.
• Proportionality: The collateral damage to civilians and the environment is disproportionate to military advantage.

Environmental Law

• Environmental Destruction: DU causes complex damage to the environment, contradicting international environmental protections in warfare.
• Precautionary Principle: Even in the absence of full scientific certainty, precautionary measures should be taken against the use of DU weapons.
• Basel and Stockholm Conventions: While not explicitly covering DU, these treaties emphasize the importance of limiting hazardous waste and environmental pollution, principles that apply to DU contamination.

Human Rights Law

• Right to Health and Life: DU exposure has been linked to severe health conditions, including cancer and birth defects, violating human rights protections.
• Environmental Rights: International human rights frameworks recognize the right to a clean and safe environment, which DU weapons threaten.
• Accountability and Legal Redress: Human rights bodies may be approached via communication and other procedures calling for transparency, assistance, and compensation for those affected by DU contamination.

Prohibition Treaties and National Bans

• No Universal Treaty Ban: DU is not categorized as a nuclear, radiological, or chemical weapon under existing treaties.
• National Legislation: Belgium (2007) and Costa Rica (2011) have implemented national bans on DU weapons.
• International Resolutions: UN General Assembly resolutions have repeatedly called for transparency, assistance and a precautionary approach.
• European Parliament and Council of Europe: Both bodies have raised concerns about DU calling for a moratorium and a ban on DU weapons.

Customary Clause and War Crimes Considerations

• Martens Clause: The principle that emerging weapons should be assessed based on humanity and public conscience suggests DU weapons should be considered illegal.
• War Crimes Potential: The use of DU munitions could qualify as a war crime under the Geneva Conventions and the International Criminal Court (ICC) statutes due to their lasting harm to civilians and the environment.

Arms Trade Law

• Arms Trade Treaty (ATT): Countries are prohibited from exporting weapons that violate IHL or human rights law. DU weapons fall under this restriction.
• Prohibition of Proliferation: States have an obligation to prevent the spread of DU munitions under common international law principles.

Conclusion

While no explicit global ban exists, the legal framework surrounding IHL, environmental law, and human rights law makes the use of DU weapons illegal. Their long-term harm to both human populations and the environment underscores the necessity of a full international prohibition, or ban, for which ICBUW has presented a Draft Convention