Legal Implications of Autonomous Warships under UNCLOS: Navigating Definitional Gaps in International Maritime Law

Afiat Yudhistira; Davina Oktivana

doi:10.58829/lp.12.2.2025.289

Authors

Afiat Yudhistira Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia
Davina Oktivana Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.58829/lp.12.2.2025.289

Keywords:

Accountability, Autonomous warships, Legal implications, Maritime norms, Sovereignty, UNCLOS

Abstract

Rapid technological advancements have outpaced legal frameworks in regulating autonomous warships, as United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) human-centered definition fails to accommodate crewless or semi-autonomous vessels in modern naval operations. This study examines the legal implications of this definitional gap and explores how international law might evolve to address the governance of autonomous warships. Key issues include sovereignty, accountability, and compliance with existing maritime and wartime legal norms, such as whether a fully autonomous vessel can qualify as a warship under UNCLOS and what responsibilities states bear for their actions in conflict scenarios. Using a normative legal research design with doctrinal and conceptual approaches, the study analyzes UNCLOS, COLREGs, and SOLAS, employing deductive and analogical reasoning to compare autonomous vessels with technologies like remotely piloted UAVs. Autonomous warships do not fully qualify as warships under UNCLOS due to the absence of human command and crew, leading to ambiguities in liability, navigation compliance, cybersecurity risks, and humanitarian duties. However, remote operation and flag state discretion may allow classification, highlighting gaps in existing frameworks.

References

Ahmed, Yaseen Adnan, Gerasimos Theotokatos, Ilia Maslov, Lars Andreas Lien Wennersberg, and Dag Atle Nesheim. “Regulatory and legal frameworks recommendations for short sea shipping maritime autonomous surface ships.” Marine policy 166 (2024): 106226.

Ahvenjärvi, Sauli. “The human element and autonomous ships.” TransNav: International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation 10, no. 3 (2016): 517-521.

Area, Sara Cabanas. “Liability for Defective Products in Autonomous Ships: Implications of Directive (EU) 2024/2853.” Cuadernos Derecho Transnacional 17 (2025): 80.

Azad, Tahir Mahmood, Muhammad Waqas Haider, and Muhammad Sadiq. “Understanding gray zone warfare from multiple perspectives.” World Affairs 186, no. 1 (2023): 81-104.

Bačkalov, Igor. “Safety of autonomous inland vessels: An analysis of regulatory barriers in the ddpresent technical standards in Europe.” Safety science 128 (2020): 104763.

Barrera, Carlos, I. Padron, F. S. Luis, and Octavio Llinas. “Trends and challenges in unmanned surface vehicles (Usv): From survey to shipping.” TransNav: International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation 15 (2021): 430-452.

Bosch, Hieronymus. “Column: Semi-Autonomous Navigation: Yara Birkeland, Suzaku, Njord Forseti and Orca Ai [Offshore Accounts].” Baird Maritime, Work Boat World, August 29, 2022. Retrieved in November 27, 2025 from. www.bairdmaritime.com/work-boat-world/offshore-world/column-semi-autonomous-navigation-yara-birkeland-suzaku-njord-forseti-and-orca-ai-offshore-accounts/.

Cavas, Christopher P. “Unmanned Sub-Hunter to Begin Test Program.” Defense News, August 19, 2022. Retrieved in November 27, 2025 from. www.defensenews.com/story/defense-news/2016/04/07/darpa-actuv-sea-hunter-test-antisubmarine-warfare-asw-drone-unmanned-vigor-portland-onr-naval-research/82744862/.

Chircop, Aldo. “Testing international legal regimes: The advent of automated commercial vessels.” German Yearbook of International Law 60, no. 1 (2018): 109-142.

Choi, Junghwan, and Sangil Lee. “Legal status of the remote operator in Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS) under maritime law.” Ocean Development & International Law 52, no. 4 (2022): 445-462.

Collin, Felix. “Maritime Product Liability at the Dawn of Unmanned Ships–the Finnish Perspective.” SIMPLY: Scandinavian Institute of Maritime Law Yearbook 2018 (2018): 7-48.

Comité Maritime International (CMI). CMI International Working Group Position Paper on Unmanned Ships and the International Regulatory Framework. 2018.

Convention of 25 August 1924 for the Unification of Certain Rules of Law Relating to Bills of Lading (Treaty Series 1953, 109), as amended by the Protocol of 23 February 1968 (Treaty Series 1979, 26) and 21 December 1979 (Treaty Series 1985, 122).

Crootof, Rebecca. “The killer robots are here: Legal and policy implications.” Cardozo L. Rev. 36 (2014): 1837.

Dong, Bingying, Lowell Bautista, and Ling Zhu. “Navigating uncharted waters: Challenges and regulatory solutions for flag state jurisdiction of Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships under UNCLOS.” Marine Policy 161 (2024): 106039.

Felski, Andrzej, and Karolina Zwolak. “The ocean-going autonomous ship Challenges and threats.” Journal of marine science and engineering 8, no. 1 (2020): 41.

García-Llave, Ruth, Fabio Héctor Echeverry Andrade, and Daniel José Coronil Huertas. “Autonomous ships and flag state: challenges and opportunities in international maritime law: R. García-Llave et al.” Journal of Transportation Security 18, no. 1 (2025): 15.

Guevara, David, and Dimitrios Dalaklis. “Understanding the interrelation between the Safety of Life at Sea Convention and Certain IMO’s Code.” TransNav: International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation 15 (2021).

Hasan, Sabrina. “Analysing the definition of “ship” to facilitate Marine Autonomous Surface Ships as ship under the law of the sea.” Australian Journal of Maritime & Ocean Affairs 15, no. 3 (2023): 268-283.

ICC-IMB. Piracy and Armed Robbery Against Ships Report January-December 2023. 2023.

International Maritime Organization (IMO). Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREGs). 1050 UNTS 16, UKTS 77, 1977.

International Maritime Organization (IMO). International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS). 1184 UNTS 3, 1974.

International Maritime Organization (IMO). Report on MASS Trials of 'VN REBEL' Conducted in Accordance with the Interim Guidelines for MASS Trials. MSC 104/INF.19, 2018.

Issa, Mohamad, Adrian Ilinca, Hussein Ibrahim, and Patrick Rizk. “Maritime autonomous surface ships: Problems and challenges facing the regulatory process.” Sustainability 14, no. 23 (2022): 15630.

Jackson, Van. “Tactics of strategic competition: Gray zones, redlines, and conflicts before war.” Naval War College Review 70, no. 3 (2017): 39-62.

Jagota, S. P. “The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982.” Ocean Yearbook Online 5, no. 1 (1985): 10-28.

Johansson, Lasse, J-P. Jalkanen, Juha Kalli, and Jaakko Kukkonen. “The evolution of shipping emissions and the costs of regulation changes in the northern EU area.” Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics 13, no. 22 (2013): 11375-11389.

Jones, Andy, and Omera Khan. “Surviving NotPetya: Global supply chains in the era of the cyber weapon.” In Cyber security and supply chain management: risks, challenges, and solutions, Singapura: Word Scientifict. 2021, pp. 133-146.

Karetnikov, Vladimir, Evgeniy Ol’Khovik, Aleksandra Ivanova, and Artem Butsanets. “Technology level and development trends of autonomous shipping means.” In Energy Management of Municipal Transportation Facilities and Transport, pp. 421-432. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2019.

Karlis, Thanasis. “Maritime law issues related to the operation of unmanned autonomous cargo ships.” WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs 17, no. 1 (2018): 119-128.

Kim, Tae-eun, and Jens-Uwe Schröder-Hinrichs. “Research developments and debates regarding maritime autonomous surface ship: status, challenges and perspectives.” New Maritime Business: uncertainty, sustainability, technology and big data (2021): 175-197.

Kraska, James, and Raul Pedrozo. International Maritime Security Law. Massachusetts: Brill Nijhoff, 2018.

Kraska, James, Raul Pedrozo, David Letts, Wolff Heintschel von Heinegg, Robert McLaughlin, James Farrant, Yurika Ishii, Gurpreet S. Khurana, and Koki Sato. The Newport Manual on the Law of Naval Warfare. Naval War College: Stockton Center for the Study of International Law, 2023.

Krishnan, Armin. “Fifth generation warfare, hybrid warfare, and gray zone conflict.” Journal of Strategic Security 15, no. 4 (2022): 14-31.

Leys, Nathan. “Autonomous Weapon Systems, International Crises, and Anticipatory Self-Defense.” Yale J. Int'l L. 45 (2020): 377.

Makowski, Andrzej. “Dilemmas faced in developing small navies.” Naval War College Review 76, no. 1 (2023): 97-118.

Marinet. “Autonomous Navigation Pilot Project on Commercial Fleet Vessels.” Marinet. August 19, 2022. Retrieved in November 27, 2025 from. https://marinet.org/autonomous-and-remote-navigation-trial-project-arntp/.

Morris, Lyle J., Michael J. Mazarr, Jeffrey W. Hornung, Stephanie Pezard, Anika Binnendijk, and Marta Kepe. Gaining competitive advantage in the gray zone: Response options for coercive aggression below the threshold of major war. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation, 2019.

Nasu, Hitoshi, and David Letts. “The legal characterization of lethal autonomous maritime systems: warship, torpedo, or naval mine?” International Law Studies 96, no. 1 (2020): 4.

Nawrot, Justyna, and Zuzanna Pepłowska-Dąbrowska. “Revolution or evolution? Challenges posed by autonomous vessels for national and international legal framework.” Comparative Law Review 25 (2019): 239-255.

Nottebohm Case (Liechtenstein v. Guatemala). International Court of Justice (ICJ), 6 April 1955. International Court of Justice. Retrieved in Septembeo, https://www.icj-cij.org/case/18.

Oxman, Bernard H. “The regime of warships under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.” Va. J. Int'l L. 24 (1983): 809.

Parker, Jennifer. “The challenges posed by the advent of maritime autonomous surface ships for international maritime law.” Australian and New Zealand Maritime Law Journal 35, no. 1 (2021): 31-42.

Parlov, Iva. “Remotely Controlled Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS), the “Genuine Link” Requirement, and the “Effectiveness” of Flag State Jurisdiction: Key Problems and Prospects.” Ocean Development & International Law 56, no. 2 (2025): 214-231.

Pietrzykowski, J., Z. Pietrzykowski, and J. Hajduk. “Operations of maritime autonomous surface ships.” TransNav: International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation 13, no. 4 (2019): 725-733.

Pietrzykowski, Zbigniew, Piotr Wołejsza, Łukasz Nozdrzykowski, Piotr Borkowski, Paweł Banaś, Janusz Magaj, Jarosław Chomski et al. “The autonomous navigation system of a sea-going vessel.” Ocean Engineering 261 (2022): 112104.

Regulations for the Prevention of Pollution by Garbage from Ships (Annex V of MARPOL 73/78). U.S. G.P.O., 1987.

Ringbom, Henrik. “Regulating autonomous ships concepts, challenges and precedents.” Ocean Development & International Law 50, no. 2-3 (2019): 141-169.

Schmitt, Michael N. “Grey zones in the international law of cyberspace.” Yale J. Int'l L. Online 42 (2017): 1.

Seabra Venancio, Daiana. “Challenges in Defining the Legal Status of Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUVs).” Ocean Development & International Law 56, no. 3 (2025): 340-367.

Stępień, Barbara, and Mauro Arturo Rivera León. “Law enforcement in autonomous shipping: rethinking jurisdictional challenges under UNCLOS.” International & Comparative Law Quarterly 74, no. S1 (2025): 47-62.

Sümer, Murat. “Applicability of the right of innocent passage to maritime autonomous surface ships: Exploring the potential role of advisory opinions.” ASCOMARE YEARBOOK (2023): 149.

Sunderland, Judith. “The Mediterranean Migration Crisis: Why People Flee, What the EU Should Do.” Human Rights Watch, 2015. Retrieved in November 27, 2025 from. https://www.hrw.org/report/2015/06/19/mediterranean-migration-crisis/why-people-flee-what-eu-should-do.

The Muscat Dhows Case (France v. Great Britain). Permanent Court of Arbitration, 1916.

Tokuchi, Hideshi. “The Gray Zone in the Definition of Gray-Zone Warfare: Challenges for Japan-US Cooperation.” Murky Waters in the East China Sea: Chinese Gray-Zone Operations and US-Japan Alliance Cooperation (2021): 1-10.

U.S. Department of the Navy. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5030.8C: General Guidance for the Classification of Naval Vessels and Battle Force Ship Counting Procedures. 2016.

United Nations. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). 1833 U.N.T.S. 397, 1982.

van den Broek, J. Hans, JR Jaco Griffioen, and M. Monique van der Drift. “Meaningful human control in autonomous shipping: An overview.” In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, vol. 929, no. 1, p. 012008. IOP Publishing, 2020.

Veal, Robert. “Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships: autonomy, manning and the IMO.” Shipping & Trade Law 18, no. 5 (2018): 1-4.

Vincent, James. “The US Navy’s New Autonomous Warship Is Called the Sea Hunter.” The Verge, April 8, 2016. Retrieved in November 27, 2025 from. www.theverge.com/2016/4/8/11391840/us-navy-autonomous-ship-sea-hunter-christened.

Yurika, Ishii. “Attacks on commercial maritime autonomous surface ships at sea.” Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy 8, no. 2 (2023): 266-286.