Legally binding unilateral declarations of States

Definition
 {| class="wikitable mw-collapsible" style="background-color:#ffffcc;" ! scope="col" style="background-color:#ffffaa;"| Legally binding unilateral declarations of States
 * Legally binding unilateral declarations of States.svg certain circumstances, a unilateral declaration of a State may give rise to legally binding obligations onto the declaring State. The binding character of such a declaration is based on the principle of good faith.
 * Legally binding unilateral declarations of States.svg certain circumstances, a unilateral declaration of a State may give rise to legally binding obligations onto the declaring State. The binding character of such a declaration is based on the principle of good faith.

States regularly resort to unilateral declarations in the cyber context, including declarations on the possible content of confidence-building measures for cyber space, declarations of disapproval regarding specific cyber behaviour by other States,  declarations regarding the attribution of specific cyber attacks, and national position papers on cyber space. It is, however, doubtful that these declarations fulfil the criteria for binding unilateral declarations.

For a unilateral declaration to be legally binding, the following criteria must be met:
 * 1) The declaration must be made publicly. It may be expressed either in oral or written form. The declaration may be addressed to a specific subject of international law, i.e., a State, or to the international community as a whole.
 * 2) The declaration must express the will of the declaring State to be bound by the declaration. To determine whether a declaration is binding, its content, all the factual circumstances in which it was made, and the reactions to which it gave rise must be considered.
 * 3) The declaring state organ must be authorized to make the according declaration, as is presumed for heads of State, heads of Government, and ministers for foreign affairs.
 * 4) The content of the declaration must be sufficiently clear and specific. The obligations themselves must be interpreted primarily considering the text together with the context and the circumstances in which it was formulated. In case of doubt, a restrictive interpretation should be chosen.