Attribution of Cyber Operations by Non-State Actors under the Law of State Responsibility: With a Focus on the Cases of North Korea

AbstractThis article comments on Jörn Griebel and Milan Plücken's recent analysis in the Leiden Journal of International Law of the approach of the International Court of Justice to state responsibility in its judgment in the Genocide (Bosnia v. Serbia) case. The article also provides more general remarks on the law of state responsibility as it pertains to acts of non-state actors. In that regard, it discusses attribution based on de facto organ status and attribution based on direction and control, as well as whether, as a matter of policy, the law of state responsibility meets the needs of the modern world.

Download Full-text

R.P. Barnidge Jr, Non-State Actors and Terrorism: Applying the Law of State Responsibility and the Due Diligence Principle, T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague 2008, xvi + 244 pp., UK£ 45 / US$ 90. ISBN 978-90-6704-259-8.

Netherlands International Law Review ◽

10.1017/s0165070x08004014 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 55 (03) ◽

pp. 401

Author(s):

James Upcher

Keyword(s):

State Responsibility ◽

Due Diligence ◽

The Hague ◽

State Actors ◽

The Law

Download Full-text

Historical Development

10.1093/oso/9780198819868.003.0008 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Kubo Mačák

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Historical Development ◽

General Trend ◽

Armed Conflicts ◽

Fundamental Transformation ◽

State Actors ◽

The Law ◽

State Relations ◽

Inter State ◽

State Territory

This chapter traces the development of the law of belligerent occupation in order to identify trends relevant to the regulation of internationalized armed conflicts. It observes that despite the general grounding of this body of law in a state-centric paradigm, several isolated developments have contemplated the possibility of non-state actors becoming belligerent occupants of a portion of state territory. Moreover, the chapter highlights that the law of belligerent occupation has undergone a fundamental transformation as part of a general trend of individualization and humanization of international law. Therefore, it is no longer simply a brake on inter-state relations and a protector of states’ interests and institutions. Instead, the law has gradually brought individuals’ interests to the fore, putting persons before institutions and individuals before states. Overall, the chapter uncovers the historical reasons that support an extensive view of the applicability of the law of occupation to modern internationalized armed conflicts.

Download Full-text

Common Interests of Humankind and the International Regulation of the Use of Force

10.1093/oso/9780198825210.003.0022 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Enzo Cannizzaro

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Use Of Force ◽

State Responsibility ◽

International Regulation ◽

Philosophical Foundations ◽

Un Security Council ◽

Common Interests ◽

The Law ◽

Mere Existence ◽

Further Development

The chapter discusses the philosophical foundations of the current regulation of the use of force. The chapter argues that, in correspondence with the emergence of a sphere of substantive rules protecting common interests of humankind, international law is also gradually developing a system of protection against egregious breaches of these interests. This conclusion is reached through an analysis of the law and practice governing the action of the UN Security Council as well as the law of state responsibility concerning individual and collective reactions to serious breaches of common interests. This system is based on positive obligations imposed upon individual states as well as UN organs, and it appears to be still rudimentary and inefficient. However, the chapter suggests that the mere existence of this system, these shortcomings notwithstanding, has the effect of promoting the further development of the law in search for more appropriate mechanisms of protection.

Download Full-text