Legal Protection of Medical Professionals in Armed Conflicts: Challenges in the Era of Autonomous and AI‑Driven Warfare — A Case Study of Pakistan’s Disputed Areas
Clicks: 38
ID: 311638
2025
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Popular Article
11.1
/100
38 views
11 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
PopularRanked #8 of 11 articles by views in Sarhad Journal of Legal Studies
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The protection of medical professionals in armed conflicts is a cornerstone of international humanitarian law (IHL), ensuring that doctors, nurses, and humanitarian personnel can provide care without fear of attack. However, the emergence of autonomous weapon systems (AWS) and AI-driven warfare presents unprecedented challenges to these protections, particularly in complex and disputed regions such as Pakistan’s Line of Control (LoC) and former tribal areas. This study examines the legal framework safeguarding medical personnel, analyzes the implications of AI and autonomous systems on core IHL principles such as distinction, proportionality, and precaution, and explores the risks posed to medical neutrality in technologically advanced warfare. Using a doctrinal and case-study research design, the paper evaluates both international law and Pakistan-specific conflict contexts, highlighting gaps in enforcement, accountability, and operational safeguards. Key findings indicate that while formal IHL protections remain applicable, the use of autonomous and AI-enabled systems significantly increases risks to medical personnel, undermines human judgment in targeting decisions, and creates accountability gaps. The study concludes with recommendations for strengthened human-control obligations, enhanced operational protocols, and binding legal instruments to preserve medical neutrality in the era of AI-driven conflict
| Reference Key |
imported_1771153011_6991a673d5249
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Nasir Ali |
| Journal | Sarhad Journal of Legal Studies |
| Year | 2025 |
| DOI |
DOI not found
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.