![]() ![]() ![]() The ICJ found that Uganda had failed to meet both “obligations arising under principles of non-use of force and non-intervention”. The following diagram shows the categorisation of cyber acts that are considered “wrongful” from the perspective of international law:Īs shown, there are three categories of cyber acts that are considered “wrongful” for a State to engage in – intervention, use of force, and armed attack. It should be noted that all three are considered interventions in their own right and can occur in parallel – with the use of force and then armed attacks seen as progressively worse categories of intervention. The International Court of Justice also confirmed the parallel nature of such interventions in the Case Concerning Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo in 2005. the act must relate to matters that involve the internal or external affairs of the target State and.Furthermore, this principle is considered a customary norm implied within Articles 2(1), 2(3), and 2(4) of the United Nations Charter and the Friendly Relations Declaration of 1970.Īn act will be considered a prohibited intervention by a State if the following two conditions are met: The principle of non-intervention is an extension upon the concept of sovereignty, reflected by Rule 66 of the Tallinn Manual 2.0, where it states that “a State may not intervene, including by cyber means, in the internal or external affairs of another State”. It is widely agreed that the principle of State sovereignty does apply in cyberspace, and this is reflected in Rule 1 of the Tallinn Manual 2.0. The principle of sovereignty first emerged from the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia that gave birth to the modern system of nation-states. As a foundational principle of international law, the concept of sovereignty is “the collection of rights held by a state, first in its capacity as the entity entitled to exercise control over its territory and second in its capacity to act on the international plane, representing that territory and its people”. Greater clarity is needed regarding the international law principle of non-intervention within the cyber domain. Focus and attention are especially required on State-based interventions that do not meet the current “use of force” criteria. The Principle of Non-Intervention is “one of the most potent and elusive of all international law principles”. It is considered potent due to the countermeasures deployed in response to an intervention but elusive due to the uncertainty and lack of clarity regarding which actions constitute a breach of the non-intervention principle within the cyber domain. This absence of certainty largely stems from the fact that States find themselves applying a legal framework implemented many years before the emergence of cyber technologies being used in the attacks. This has resulted in frustration within the international community due to the emergence of “grey areas”, as the existing law trails behind the advancement of technology and an ever-increasing risk that these “grey areas” will be used to the advantage of some States’ over others. ![]() Although the principle of non-intervention is not specifically mentioned within the Charter, it is generally accepted that it is implied through this statement of sovereign equality. ![]() Īrticle 2(1) of the UN Charter states that “the Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members”. This poses a challenge when these vulnerabilities are exploited by one State over another, as the available international law for such scenarios has been written with armed attacks and physical breaches in mind. Cyber operations can have the same impact as a military attack however, the majority of cyber-attacks do not result in physical damage to infrastructure or injury to persons, and from an international law perspective, are below the threshold to be considered a "use of force" or an "armed attack" by a State. As Nation States increase the domestic and international interconnectedness of their societies, they in turn, increase their vulnerability to manipulation, disruption, and attacks on the critical infrastructure and services that support the political, economic, and social activities of their nation. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |