This research examines the legality of armed drone warfare under international law, with particular emphasis on civilian protection and accountability. It analyses the use of drones within the frameworks of jus ad bellum, International Humanitarian Law (IHL), and International Human Rights Law (IHRL), focusing on the protection of the right to life and the regulation of targeted killings. Employing a doctrinal legal methodology, the study relies on an analytical examination of international treaties, customary international law, judicial decisions, and scholarly literature to assess whether existing legal norms adequately regulate drone operations. The research finds that armed drones are not prohibited weapons per se under international law; however, their legality is strictly conditional upon compliance with fundamental principles of distinction, proportionality, necessity, and precaution. While drone technology may enhance precision in theory, state practice reveals persistent risks of civilian harm, particularly in extraterritorial and counterterrorism operations conducted outside active hostilities. The study further concludes that IHRLcontinues to apply alongside IHL, rendering many drone strikes unlawful as arbitrary deprivations of life or extrajudicial executions where arrest is feasible and no imminent threat exists. Finally, the research identifies significant deficiencies in transparency, investigation, and accountability mechanisms, highlighting a persistent gap between established legal standards and operational practice. The study underscores the need for strengthened regulation and accountability to ensure effective civilian protection in drone warfare.