Violations of Sovereignty in “Cyberspace” Under the United Nations Charter
- Autores: Assaf A.1
-
Afiliações:
- Specialist in International Law
- Edição: Volume 1, Nº 3 (2023)
- Páginas: 4–20
- Seção: Theoretical Inquiries
- URL: https://journal-vniispk.ru/2949-5717/article/view/319973
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.17323/jil.2023.18848
- ID: 319973
Citar
Texto integral
Resumo
Affirming that violating State sovereignty through and against “cyber” infrastructure could be covered by the scope of Art. 2(4) and(7) of the United Nations Charter is one of the most pressing challenges that faces international law today. This article aims to address this issue by expanding on a general taxonomy outlined in the Tallinn Manual 2.0 on violations of sovereignty in “cyberspace”. These violations are categorised as conducts leading to either “infringement upon the target State’s territorial integrity” or “interference or usurpation of inherently governmental functions”. In order to map the taxonomy of the Tallinn Manual 2.0 onto Art.2(4) and (7), it is necessary to highlight the convergence between territorial sovereignty and “cyberspace” that allows for extending the scope of application of Art. 2. Through recognising data as “assets” that can be subject to a functional sovereignty, that in turn could be subject to unlawful use of force in violation of the general ban codified in Art. 2(4) as an “infringement upon the target State’s territorial integrity”. Extending the scope of Art. 2(7) is contingent upon defining the concept of intervention as a conduct aiming to unlawfully assume an exclusive competence of a State by another State. Under this concept, intervention in “cyberspace” could be envisaged as attempts to gain control over the functionality of certain “cyberspace” infrastructure that is instrumental for the manifestation of State exclusive competences. A process that demands taking control of that entity to an extent impinging the regular functioning of the targeted entity beyond the mere manipulation of data. Under the proposed definition of intervention such conduct of “interference or usurpation of inherently governmental functions” can constitute a violation to the principle of non-intervention as codified by Art. 2(7).
Sobre autores
Alaa Assaf
Specialist in International Law
Autor responsável pela correspondência
Email: alaa.assaf89@gmail.com
ORCID ID: 0000-0003-4714-1401
Specialist in International Law, Damascus, Syria
Bibliografia
- Banks W. (2021) Cyber Attribution and State Responsibility. International Law Studies, vol. 97, pp. 1039–1072.
- Broeders D. et al. (2022) Revisiting Past Cyber Operations in Light of New Cyber Norms and Interpretations of International Law: Inching towards Lines in the Sand? Journal of Cyber Policy, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 97–135. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/23738871.2022.2041061
- Buchan R. (2018) Cyber Espionage and International Law, Bloomsbury.
- Buchan R., Tsagourias N. (2021) Regulating the Use of Force in International Law: Stability and Change. Edward Elgar Publishing. DOI:https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786439925
- Chircop L. (2019) Territorial Sovereignty in Cyberspace after “Tallinn Manual 2.0”. Melbourne Journal of International Law, vol. 20, no. 2. Available at:http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MelbJlIntLaw/2019/14.html
- Cho S. (2021) A Social Critique of Behavioral Approaches to International Law. AJIL Unbound, vol. 115, pp. 248–252. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1017/aju.2021.36
- Conforti B. (1995) The Theory of Competence in Verdross. European Journal of International Law, vol. 6, pp. 70–77. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/6.1.70
- Cox N. (2006) Technology and Legal Systems, Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing Ltd.
- Crawford J. (2002) The International Law Commission’s Articles on State Responsibility: Introduction, Text and Commentaries, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
- Deibert R., Rohozinski R., Crete-Nishihata M. (2012) Cyclones in Cyberspace: Information Shaping and Denial in the 2008 Russia–Georgia War. Security Dialogue, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 3–24. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0967010611431079
- Dukkipati R. V. (2007) Solving Engineering System Dynamics Problems with MATLAB, New Age International.
- Foltz A. C. (2012) Stuxnet, Schmitt Analysis, and the Cyber Use-of-Force Debate. National Defense University, Joint Force Quarterly, vol. 47, pp. 40–48.
- Goldsmith J., Wu T. (2006) Who Controls the Internet?: Illusions of a Borderless World. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195152661.001.0001
- Gutmann A., Warner M. (2019) Fight to Be Forgotten: Exploring the Efficacy of Data Erasure in Popular Operating Systems. In: Naldi M. et. al. (eds.) Privacy Technologies and Policy, Springer. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21752-5_4
- Heckman K. E. et al. (2015) Cyber Denial, Deception and Counter Deception: A Framework for Supporting Active Cyber Defense, Springer. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25133-2
- Herzog S. (2011) Revisiting the Estonian Cyber Attacks: Digital Threats and Multinational Responses. Journal of Strategic Security, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 49–60. DOI:https://doi.org/10.5038/1944-0472.4.2.3
- Higgins R. (2009) Intervention and International Law: Themes and Theories, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Hijmans H. (2020) Article 1 Subject-Matter and Objectives. In: Kuner C. et al (eds.) The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR): A Commentary. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198826491.003.0003
- Hummel P., Braun M., Dabrock P. (2021) Own Data? Ethical Reflections on Data Ownership. Philosophy & Technology, vol. 34, pp. 545–572. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-020-00404-9
- Humphreys S. (2018) Data: The Given. In: Hohmann J., Joyce D. (eds.) International Law’s Objects, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
- Jeangène Vilmer J-B. (2014) De la mythologie française du droit d’ingérence à la responsabilité de protéger. Une clarification terminologique. Annuaire Fançais de Relations Internationales, vol. XIII, pp. 81–100. DOI:https://doi.org/10.3917/epas.haupa.2012.01.0081
- Jurcys P., Donewald C., Fenwick M., Lampinen M., Smaliukas A. (2020) Ownership of User-Held Data: Why Property Law Is the Right Approach. Harvard Journal of Law and Technology Digest, vol. no. pp. 1—30. DOI:https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3711017
- Kaur D. (2021) An Introduction to System Software, Alpha Science International.
- Kilovaty I. (2021) The International Law of Cyber Intervention. In: Tsagourias N., Buchan R. (eds.) Research Handbook on International Law and Cyberspace, Edward Elgar Publishing. DOI:https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789904253.00014
- Kim D., Solomon M. G. (2021) Fundamentals of Information Systems Security, 4th ed., Jones & Bartlett Learning.
- Korhonen O., Markovich E. (2021) Mapping Power in Cyberspace. In: Tsagourias N., Buchan R. (eds.) Research Handbook on International Law and Cyberspace, Edward Elgar Publishing. DOI:https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789904253.00012
- Käll J. (2020) The Materiality of Data as Property. Harvard International Law Journal Frontiers, vol. 61, pp. 1–11.
- Lahmann H. (2022) On the Politics and Ideologies of the Sovereignty Discourse in Cyberspace. Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law, vol. 32, pp. 61–107.
- Maurer T. (2018) Cyber Mercenaries. Cambridge, MA, USA: Cambridge University Press. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316422724
- Mcdougal M. (1953) International Law, Power, and Policy: A Contemporary Conception. Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law, Brill.
- Mignon V. (2019) Blockchains – Perspectives and Challenges. In: Kraus D., Obrist T., Hari O. (eds.) Blockchains, Smart Contracts, Decentralised Autonomous Organisations and the Law. Edward Elgar Publishing. DOI:https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788115131.00007
- Moore D., Rid T. (2016) Cryptopolitik and the Darknet. Survival, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 7–38. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2016.1142085
- Morley D., Parker C. S. (2016) Understanding Computers: Today and Tomorrow, 16th ed., New York, NY, USA: Cengage Learning.
- Murphy J. (2013) Cyber War and International Law: Does the International Legal Process Constitute a Threat to U.S. Vital Interests? International Law Studies, vol. 89, pp. 309–340.
- O’ Keefe R. (2013) Jurisdictional Immunities. In: Tams C., Sloan J. (eds.) The Development of International Law by the International Court of Justice, Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199653218.003.0007
- Pardau S.L. (2018) The California Consumer Privacy Act: Towards a European-Style Privacy Regime in the United States. Journal of Technology Law & Policy, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 68–114.
- Plakokefalos I. (2015) Causation in the Law of State Responsibility and the Problem of Overdetermination: In Search of Clarity. European Journal of International Law, vol. 26, pp. 471–492. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chv023
- Radziwill Y. (2015) Cyber-Attacks and the Exploitable Imperfections of International Law, Brill. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004298309
- Roscini M. (2014) Cyber Operations and the Use of Force in International Law, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199655014.001.0001
- Roscini M. (2021) Cyber Operations as a Use of Force. In: Tsagourias N., Buchan R. (eds.) Research Handbook on International Law and Cyberspace, Edward Elgar Publishing. DOI:https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789904253.00025
- Rosenau J. N. (1969) Intervention as a Scientific Concept. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 149–171. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/002200276901300201
- Schmitt M. (2010) Cyber Operations in International Law: The Use of Force, Collective Security, Self-Defense, and Armed Conflict, National Academies Press.
- Schmitt M. (2021) Foreign Cyber Interference in Elections. International Law Studies, vol. 97, pp. 739–764.
- Schmitt M. (ed.) Tallinn Manual 2.0 on The International Law Applicable to Cyber Operations. Cambridge, MA, USA: Cambridge University Press.
- Sprankling J. G. (2014) The International Law of Property. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199654543.001.0001
- Trapp K. (2018) Boots (on the Ground). In: Joyce D. (ed.) International Law’s Objects Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 151–161. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198798200.003.0012
- Tsagourias N. (2021) The Legal Status of Cyberspace: Sovereignty Redux?. In: Tsagourias N., Buchan R. (eds.) Research Handbook on International Law and Cyberspace, Edward Elgar Publishing. DOI:https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789904253.00010
- Tzeng P. (2016) The State’s Right to Property Under International Law. Yale Law Journal, vol. 125, no. 6, pp. 1805–1806.
- Willis H. (1909) Subject-Matter. Columbia Law Review, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 419–426. DOI:https://doi.org/10.2307/1109895
- d’Aspremont J. (2011) Formalism and the Sources of International Law: A Theory of the Ascertainment of Legal Rules, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199696314.001.0001
Arquivos suplementares
