International Law and Cyberoperations

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Martina Smuclerova
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
National Strategy ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
General Consensus ◽  
The Right ◽  
Self Defence

Foreign cyberattacks and interferences are becoming more frequent and sophisticated. In the continued absence of a general consensus regarding the applicability of concrete international legal rules in the domain of cybersecurity, individual States are beginning to determine unilaterally their national positions. The article introduces and critically assesses the national strategy of France published in late 2019 in light of current international law and further developments in 2020. France confirms the validity of current international legal norms and raises challenging and innovative legal points for an efficient update such as the right to respond to any unlawful cyberoperation that targets France, right to preemptive self-defence, and violation of the due diligence principle. The mission of the article is to evaluate the document as an important source of impetus and the potential of its impact in international law of cybersecurity.

The invocation of the right to self-defence in response to armed attacks conducted by armed groups: Implications for attribution

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (01) ◽  
pp. 91-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erika de Wet
Keyword(s):  
Due Diligence ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
Armed Attack ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
State Actors ◽  
The Right ◽  
United Nations Charter ◽  
Territorial States ◽  
Self Defence

AbstractThe right to self-defence in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter is increasingly being invoked in response to armed attacks conducted by armed groups located in a territory of another state, with or without the (direct) assistance of such a state. This article examines the implications of the invocation of the right to self-defence under these circumstances for the principles of attribution within thejus ad bellumparadigm. First, it illuminates how the threshold requirements for indirect armed attacks (that is, the state acting through a private actor) have been lowered since the 1986Nicaraguadecision of the International Court of Justice. In so doing, the article suggests that in order to prevent a complete erosion of the benchmarks of an indirect armed attack, the notions of ‘substantial involvement’ in an armed attack, ‘harbouring’, and ‘unwillingness’ should be interpreted as manifestations of due diligence. Thereafter, the article illustrates that there is also an increasing attribution of armed attacks directly to non-state actors, notably those located in areas over which territorial states have lost control. Such states could be depicted as being ‘unable’ to counter the activities of non-state actors. The article further submits that particularly in these instances, the principle of necessity within the self-defence paradigm can play an important role in curbing the potential for abuse inherent in the vague notion of ‘inability’, if interpreted in light of Article 25 of the Articles on State Responsibility for Internationally Wrongful Acts.

scholarly journals Comparative International Law

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Norms ◽  
Domestic Institutions ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Diverse Backgrounds ◽  
Geographic Differences ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Cross Country ◽  
The One

By definition, international law, once agreed upon and consented to, applies to all parties equally. It is perhaps the one area of law where cross-country comparison seems inappropriate, because all parties are governed by the same rules. However, as this book explains, states sometimes adhere to similar, and other times adopt different, interpretations of the same international norms and standards. International legal rules are not a monolithic whole, but are the basis for ongoing contestation, in which states set forth competing interpretations. International norms are interpreted and redefined by national executives, legislatures, and judiciaries. These varying and evolving interpretations can, in turn, change and impact the international rules themselves. These similarities and differences make for an important, but thus far largely unexamined, object of comparison. This is the premise for this book, and for what the editors call “comparative international law.” This book achieves three goals. The first is to show that international law is not a monolith. The second is to map the cross-country similarities and differences in international legal norms in different fields of international law, as well as their application and interpretation with regards to geographic differences. The third is to make a first and preliminary attempt to explain these differences. The book’s contributors include leading international law and comparative law scholars with diverse backgrounds, experience, and perspectives. It is organized into three broad thematic sections, exploring: conceptual matters, domestic institutions and comparative international law, and comparing approaches across issue-areas.

Self-Defence and Israel in International Law: A Reappraisal

1976 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 516-562 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barry Feinstein
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Self Help ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Self Defence

Dean Acheson frankly reconfirmed the right of self-preservation, when he asserted, “…law simply does not deal with … questions of ultimate power—power that comes close to the sources of sovereignty…. No law can destroy the state creating the law. The survival of states is not a matter of law”. It is beyond the law.Given the existence of man's elementary loyalty to autonomous states, the necessity for using force springs from the need of states to depend fundamentally on self-help in order to guarantee their survival and welfare. This search for security in a system of politics without government, forces the state to be dependent upon military self-help.

The Preamble

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Casey-Maslen Stuart ◽  
Clapham Andrew ◽  
Giacca Gilles ◽  
Parker Sarah
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Treaty ◽  
Humanitarian Operations ◽  
The Right ◽  
Self Defence ◽  
Do So

This chapter analyses the preamble of the ATT. The preamble of an international treaty typically sets out its purpose and the context of its adoption. The ATT is unusual in that in addition to eighteen preambular paragraphs it contains a set of eight principles in accordance with which the states parties are ‘determined to act’. Each of the preambular paragraphs includes an acknowledgement of the right of all states to manufacture, develop, acquire, import, export, transfer, and retain conventional arms and related items and capabilities for self-defence and security needs and in order to participate in peace support and humanitarian operations. This right, however, does not create any obligation for states to do so and such rights must be exercised in accordance with international law.

scholarly journals Ethics and international law: integrating the global justice project(s)

2013 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Ratner
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
Interdisciplinary Approach ◽  
World Order ◽  
The Other ◽  
Just World ◽  
Missed Opportunities ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Cost

Academic discourse on global justice is at an all-time high. Within ethics and international law, scholars are undertaking new inquiries into age-old questions of building a just world order. Ethics – within political and moral philosophy – poses fundamental questions about responsibilities at the global level and produces a tightly reasoned set of frameworks regarding world order. International law, with its focus on legal norms and institutional arrangements, provides a path, as well as illuminates the obstacles, to implementing theories of the right or of the good. Yet despite the complementarity of these two projects, neither is drawing what it should from the other. The result is ethical scholarship that often avoids, or even misinterprets, the law; and law that marginalizes ethics even as it recognizes the importance of justice. The cost of this avoidance is a set of missed opportunities for both fields. This article seeks to help transform the limited dialogue between philosophers and international lawyers into a meaningful collaboration. Through a critical stocktaking of the contributions of the two disciplines, examining where they do and do not engage with the other, it offers an appraisal of the causes and costs of separation and an argument for an interdisciplinary approach.

Equal to the Constitution: the Sources of Law of Highest Legal Force in the Russian Federation

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (8) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Михаил Пресняков ◽  
Mikhail Pryesnyakov
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Juridical Acts ◽  
The Right

In article the question of validity of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and some other sources of the right which can also possess the highest validity is considered. In particular the author comes to a conclusion that legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation possess the highest validity and in total with the constitutional provisions represent the actual Constitution. On the other hand, both laws on amendments to the Constitution, and the universally recognized norms of international law on the validity stand below constitutional precepts of law. Acts of the Constitutional Assembly of the Russian Federation may in future be qualified as having the highest judicial effect. Such acts may abolish or change any provision of the present Constitution. At the same time the universally recognized norms of international law and the laws of the Russian Federation regulating amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation as independent juridical acts and sources of constitutional law are inferior as compared with the constitutional legal norms.

scholarly journals PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND THEIR ROLE IN CONFLICT RESOLUTION IN KOSOVO AND CRIMEA. Part 2

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Community ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Local Authorities ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Conflict Situations ◽  
History Of ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right

The second part of the article considers the issue of the contradiction of the realization of the right to self-determination and the principle of territorial integrity of Serbia and Ukraine on the example of Kosovo and Crimea. It presents an analysis of the legitimacy of the will expression of Kosovars and Crimeans and its compliance with the norms of international law. The preconditions and factors of the ethnopolitical conflict are examined and the main problematic issues that caused controversies between the central and local authorities in Kosovo and Crimea are identified. The article emphasizes that the result of the plebiscites in Kosovo (1998) and Crimea (2014) was the declaration of independence, denied by central authorities of Serbia and Ukraine and met with mixed reactions by the international community. The self-proclaimed republics have only external features of statehood and are subject to external administration of other countries. A latent opposition of geopolitical opponents in the international arena is noted, which is to some extent traced through the position on the recognition / non-recognition of Kosovo and Crimea. The article draws attention to the fact that inconsistent interpretations of certain principles of international law promote secession movements in countries where conflicts periodically arise between central and local authorities. The emphasis is placed on the necessity of a clearer definition of the aforementioned international legal norms and obligations undertaken by subjects of international law. The article holds that in order to avoid such situations as in Kosovo or Crimea, to eliminate conflicts related to the possibility of an ambiguous interpretation and application of the principles of international law, an internationally recognized system of more stringent and comprehensive measures should be introduced to cease and prevent threats to the territorial integrity of countries. A strong position of the international community on the abovementioned principles with the history of the liberation movements of these peoples taken into account should become the measure precluding the aggravation of conflict situations related to the aspiration of peoples for self-determination.

scholarly journals Necessity and Proportionality and the Right of Self-Defence in International Law

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris O'Meara
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Total Force ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Defensive Action ◽  
The Right ◽  
Conceptual Meaning ◽  
Self Defence

States invariably justify using force extraterritorially by reference to their inherent right of self-defence. In so doing, they accept that the exercise of such right is conditioned by the customary international law requirements of necessity and proportionality. To date, these requirements have received little attention. They are notorious for being normatively indeterminate and operationally complex. As a breach of either requirement renders ostensibly defensive action unlawful, increased determinacy regarding their scope and content is crucial to how international law constrains military force. This book examines the conceptual meaning, substance and practical application of necessity and proportionality as they relate to the right of self-defence following the adoption of the UN Charter in 1945. It provides a coherent and up-to-date description of the applicable contemporary international law and proposes an analytical framework to guide its operation and appraisal. This book contends that necessity and proportionality are conceptually distinct and must be applied in the foregoing order to avoid an insufficient ‘catch-all’ description of (il)legality. Necessity determines whether defensive force may be used to respond to an armed attack and where it must be directed. Proportionality governs how much total force is permissible and prohibits excessive responses. Both requirements are shown to apply on an ongoing basis throughout the duration of an armed conflict prompted by self-defence. Compliance with necessity and proportionality ensures that the purposes of self-defence are met (and nothing more) and that defensive force is not unduly disruptive to third-party interests and to international peace and security.

scholarly journals UŻYWANIE DRONÓW W CELU ZWALCZANIA TERRORYZMU ŚWIETLE ‘IUS AD BELLUM’

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Łukasz Kułaga
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
International Terrorism ◽  
Controversial Issues ◽  
Legal Regulations ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Military ◽  
Self Defence

The Use of Drones in Combating International Terrorism from the Perspective of ‘ius ad bellum’Summary The increasing practice of using armed unmanned aerial vehicles (military UAVs, commonly known as drones) by some countries to eliminate suspected terrorists raises a number of controversies from the perspective of international law. These controversies are also related to the specific features of military UAVs, which make it possible to kill targeted individuals without risk to the military personnel of the country concerned, and thereby may encourage the abusive interpretation of the applicable legal regulations. This article discusses these issues from the perspective of ius ad bellum, in particular the right to self-defence. It shows the main controversial points on the scope of invoking the right to self-defence in such cases, in particular the possibility of invoking the right to self-defence in response to an attack by a non-state entity, the question of pre-emptive self-defence, the importance of the severity of the force used as a condition allowing for the use of force in self-defence, and the relevance of the principles of proportionality and necessity. The article also presents an outline of the vast and highly controversial issues associated with the definition of terrorism from the point of view of international law.

Hot Pursuit

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bill Gilmore
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
International Law ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
The State ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Legal Justification ◽  
The Right ◽  
Self Defence

This chapter examines the doctrine of ‘hot pursuit’ used by the state to exercise its coercive powers beyond national territory for law enforcement purposes. It discusses hot pursuit by sea, land, and air in the context of international law, particularly with respect to self-defence and reprisal. Whilst hot pursuit is well recognized in the customary international law of the sea, it has yet to achieve that form of normative recognition in relation to pursuit on land or by air. The chapter considers the debate over hot pursuit as a legal justification for cross-border military incursions independent of the right of self-defence and describes the concept of extended constructive presence before concluding with an analysis of hot pursuit in a use of force context.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document