Attribution of cyber operations in International Law - A study of the ILC Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, non-State actors and State liability in the 21st century
(2022) LAGF03 20221Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract
- Attributing internationally wrongful acts to a particular State and liability is a complex problem in international law. The already unclear legal situation is further complicated when aspects of cyber operations are introduced with the rapid global technological development. To hold a State liable for the actions of non-State actors in cyberspace, we can only use secondary law and doctrine. The legal situation as it stands right now is based on doctrine and secondary law where the emphasis is placed on the technical evidence to hold a State accountable. It can thus be stated that there is a discrepancy between the legislation and reality. Additional problems are the nature of international law and its voluntariness. State liability for an... (More)
- Attributing internationally wrongful acts to a particular State and liability is a complex problem in international law. The already unclear legal situation is further complicated when aspects of cyber operations are introduced with the rapid global technological development. To hold a State liable for the actions of non-State actors in cyberspace, we can only use secondary law and doctrine. The legal situation as it stands right now is based on doctrine and secondary law where the emphasis is placed on the technical evidence to hold a State accountable. It can thus be stated that there is a discrepancy between the legislation and reality. Additional problems are the nature of international law and its voluntariness. State liability for an internationally wrongful act is difficult because of the rules of evidence, which allow States to evade responsibility by supporting non-State actors without concrete links.
The purpose of this essay is to critically analyse and answer the research questions on how a non-State actor's actions can be traced to a State, and what main problems arise when an act is to be traced to the accused state. The essay also provides a summary of valid law and tries to present possible solutions. The research questions that are answered are how international law can be used for State responsibility for cyber operations of non-State actors, and what are the most pronounced complications and solutions when attributing cyber operations to a State?
It can be stated that the threshold for State liability under Article 8 ARSIWA and thus the test of effective and overall control is extremely high. There is a discussion as to whether Article 8 and thus also Rule 17 of the Tallinn Manual 2.0 should be extended to include overall control. (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- Att härleda ett internationellt illegalt handlande till en viss stat och hålla denna ansvarig är ett komplext problem i folkrätten. Det oklara rättsläget kompliceras ytterligare när aspekter av cyberoperationer introduceras med den snabba globala teknologiska utvecklingen. Rättsläget som det ser ut just nu är baserat på doktrin och sekundärrätt, där vikt läggs vid den tekniska bevisningen för att statsansvar ska aktualiseras. Det kan således konstateras att det finns en diskrepans mellan lagstiftningen och verkligheten. Att hålla en stat ansvarig för en internationell illegal handling är svårt på grund av bevisreglerna, vilket gör att stater kan komma undan ansvar genom att låta cyberoperationer ske genom icke-statliga aktörer.
Syftet... (More) - Att härleda ett internationellt illegalt handlande till en viss stat och hålla denna ansvarig är ett komplext problem i folkrätten. Det oklara rättsläget kompliceras ytterligare när aspekter av cyberoperationer introduceras med den snabba globala teknologiska utvecklingen. Rättsläget som det ser ut just nu är baserat på doktrin och sekundärrätt, där vikt läggs vid den tekniska bevisningen för att statsansvar ska aktualiseras. Det kan således konstateras att det finns en diskrepans mellan lagstiftningen och verkligheten. Att hålla en stat ansvarig för en internationell illegal handling är svårt på grund av bevisreglerna, vilket gör att stater kan komma undan ansvar genom att låta cyberoperationer ske genom icke-statliga aktörer.
Syftet med uppsatsen är att kritiskt analysera och ge svar på hur en icke-statliga aktörs handlingar kan härledas till en stat, samt vilka huvudsakliga problem som uppstår när en handling ska härledas till den anklagade staten. Uppsatsen ger även en sammanfattning av gällande rätt och försöker presentera möjliga lösningar. Frågeställningarna som besvaras är hur folkrätten kan användas för statsansvar för icke-statliga aktörers cyberoperationer, vilka problem som uppstår under processen och vilka möjliga lösningar som finns.
Det kan konstateras att tröskeln för statsansvar enligt artikel 8 ARSIWA och därmed testen om effektiv och övergripande kontroll är synnerligen hög. En diskussion förs huruvida artikel 8 och därmed även regel 17 i Tallinn Manualen 2.0 bör utvidgas för att inbegripa övergripande kontroll. Detta hade utökat statsansvaret och möjliggjort folkrätten att hålla stater ansvariga för sina handlingar. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9081150
- author
- Özdemir, Jasmin Öykü LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20221
- year
- 2022
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- international law, cyber operations, state responsibility, folkrätt, ARSIWA, statsansvar, cyber law
- language
- English
- id
- 9081150
- date added to LUP
- 2022-06-28 11:25:57
- date last changed
- 2022-06-28 11:25:57
@misc{9081150,
abstract = {{Attributing internationally wrongful acts to a particular State and liability is a complex problem in international law. The already unclear legal situation is further complicated when aspects of cyber operations are introduced with the rapid global technological development. To hold a State liable for the actions of non-State actors in cyberspace, we can only use secondary law and doctrine. The legal situation as it stands right now is based on doctrine and secondary law where the emphasis is placed on the technical evidence to hold a State accountable. It can thus be stated that there is a discrepancy between the legislation and reality. Additional problems are the nature of international law and its voluntariness. State liability for an internationally wrongful act is difficult because of the rules of evidence, which allow States to evade responsibility by supporting non-State actors without concrete links.
The purpose of this essay is to critically analyse and answer the research questions on how a non-State actor's actions can be traced to a State, and what main problems arise when an act is to be traced to the accused state. The essay also provides a summary of valid law and tries to present possible solutions. The research questions that are answered are how international law can be used for State responsibility for cyber operations of non-State actors, and what are the most pronounced complications and solutions when attributing cyber operations to a State?
It can be stated that the threshold for State liability under Article 8 ARSIWA and thus the test of effective and overall control is extremely high. There is a discussion as to whether Article 8 and thus also Rule 17 of the Tallinn Manual 2.0 should be extended to include overall control.}},
author = {{Özdemir, Jasmin Öykü}},
language = {{eng}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Attribution of cyber operations in International Law - A study of the ILC Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, non-State actors and State liability in the 21st century}},
year = {{2022}},
}