联合国宪章》对 "网络空间 "主权的侵犯

Алаа Ассаф
{"title":"联合国宪章》对 \"网络空间 \"主权的侵犯","authors":"Алаа Ассаф","doi":"10.17323/jil.2023.18848","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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).","PeriodicalId":512122,"journal":{"name":"Журнал ВШЭ по международному праву (HSE University Journal of International Law)","volume":"3 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Violations of Sovereignty in “Cyberspace” Under the United Nations Charter\",\"authors\":\"Алаа Ассаф\",\"doi\":\"10.17323/jil.2023.18848\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"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).\",\"PeriodicalId\":512122,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Журнал ВШЭ по международному праву (HSE University Journal of International Law)\",\"volume\":\"3 10\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Журнал ВШЭ по международному праву (HSE University Journal of International Law)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17323/jil.2023.18848\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Журнал ВШЭ по международному праву (HSE University Journal of International Law)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17323/jil.2023.18848","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

确认通过和针对 "网络 "基础设施侵犯国家主权属于《联合国宪章》第二条第四项和第七项的管辖范围,是当今国际法面临的最紧迫挑战之一。联合国宪章》第 2(4)和(7)条是当今国际法面临的最紧迫挑战之一。本文旨在通过扩展《塔林手册 2.0》中关于 "网络空间 "中侵犯主权行为的一般分类法来解决这一问题。这些侵犯行为被归类为导致 "侵犯目标国领土完整 "或 "干涉或篡夺政府固有职能 "的行为。为了将《塔林手册 2.0》的分类法映射到《公约》第 2(4)和(7)条,《公约》第 2(4)条规定为了将《塔林手册》2.0 的分类法与第 2(4)和(7)条相联系,有必要强调领土主权与 "网络空间 "之间的趋同性,从而扩大第 2.0 条的适用范围。2.通过承认数据是可受制于职能主权的 "资产",而职能主权反过来又可在违反第 2(4)条所编纂的一般禁令的情况下非法使用武力,将其视为 "侵犯"。第 2(4)条规定 "侵犯目标国的领土完整"。扩大第 2(7)条的范围取决于对第 2(7)条的定义。扩大第 2(7)条的范围取决于将干涉的概念界定为另一国旨在非法取得一国专有 权限的行为。根据这一概念,对 "网络空间 "的干预可被视为试图控制某些 "网络空 间 "基础设施的功能,而这些基础设施对于体现国家专属权限至关重要。这一过程要求对该实体进行控制,以至影响目标实体的正常运作,而不仅仅是篡改数据。根据拟议的干预定义,这种 "干涉或篡夺政府固有职能 "的行为可能构成违反第 2(7)条规定的不干涉原则。2(7).
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Violations of Sovereignty in “Cyberspace” Under the United Nations Charter
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).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信