Breach of an international obligation: Difference between revisions

From International cyber law: interactive toolkit
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Content added Content deleted
VisualWikitext
(Created page with "== Definition == <onlyinclude>A breach of an international obligation, the term chosen by the drafters of the Articles on State Responsibility,<ref>Articles on State Responsi...")
 
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
== Definition ==
== Definition ==


<section begin=Definition />
<onlyinclude>A breach of an international obligation, the term chosen by the drafters of the Articles on State Responsibility,<ref>Articles on State Responsibility with Commentaries, commentary to Art. 2, para. 7.</ref> is the second necessary condition for a State’s responsibility for an internationally wrongful act. International obligations arise from primary rules of international law: treaties and substantive customary law.<ref>Articles on State Responsibility with Commentaries, General commentary, paragraph 1.</ref>
{| class="wikitable mw-collapsible" style="background-color:#ffffcc;"
|-
! scope="col" style="background-color:#ffffaa;"| Breach of an international obligation
|-
|The second element of an internationally wrongful act is conduct amounting to a breach of an international obligation owed by the relevant entity.<ref>Cf. Articles on State Responsibility, Art. 2(b).</ref> In this regard, it is undisputed that a cyber-related action or omission by a State may constitute a breach of its international obligations.<ref>For a detailed discussion of a breach of an international obligation by a cyber-related act, see rule 14 of Tallinn Manual 2.0 and commentary 2–11 thereto.</ref> International obligations arise from primary rules of international law:<ref>Articles on State Responsibility, General commentary, para. 1.</ref> international treaties, customary international law, and general principles of law.<ref>Statute of the International Court of Justice, of 26 June 1945, annexed to the UN Charter, Art 38(1)(a)–(c). </ref> Fault, such as intent or negligence, is not a necessary element of a breach of an international obligation, unless there exists such a requirement in the relevant primary rule.<ref>Articles on State Responsibility, Art. 2, para. 10.</ref> Similarly, there is no general requirement for the injured party to have suffered any damage—again, unless such a requirement forms part of the primary obligation in question.<ref>Articles on State Responsibility, Art. 2, para. 9.</ref>


It is impossible to provide a list of all international obligations that may be violated by resort to cyber means. However, certain rules appear with higher frequency than others. These include the [[Use of force|prohibition on the use of force]]; the [[Prohibition of intervention|prohibition of intervention]]; the obligation to respect the [[Sovereignty|sovereignty]] of other States; the obligation to respect the [[Human rights|fundamental human rights]]; the obligation of [[Due diligence|due diligence]]; and a few others.
Fault, such as intention or negligence, is not a necessary element of a breach of an international obligation, unless there exists such a requirement in the primary law that is breached.<ref>Articles on State Responsibility with Commentaries, commentary to Art. 2, para. 10.</ref>
|}<section end=Definition />

A cyber-related action or omission by a State can constitute a breach of its international obligation.<ref>For a detailed discussion of a breach of an international obligation by a cyber-related act, see rule 14 of Tallinn Manual 2.0 and commentary 2-11 thereto.</ref></onlyinclude>


== Appendixes ==
== Appendixes ==

Revision as of 08:14, 20 September 2018

Definition

Breach of an international obligation
The second element of an internationally wrongful act is conduct amounting to a breach of an international obligation owed by the relevant entity.[1] In this regard, it is undisputed that a cyber-related action or omission by a State may constitute a breach of its international obligations.[2] International obligations arise from primary rules of international law:[3] international treaties, customary international law, and general principles of law.[4] Fault, such as intent or negligence, is not a necessary element of a breach of an international obligation, unless there exists such a requirement in the relevant primary rule.[5] Similarly, there is no general requirement for the injured party to have suffered any damage—again, unless such a requirement forms part of the primary obligation in question.[6]

It is impossible to provide a list of all international obligations that may be violated by resort to cyber means. However, certain rules appear with higher frequency than others. These include the prohibition on the use of force; the prohibition of intervention; the obligation to respect the sovereignty of other States; the obligation to respect the fundamental human rights; the obligation of due diligence; and a few others.

Appendixes

See also

Notes and references

  1. ↑ Cf. Articles on State Responsibility, Art. 2(b).
  2. ↑ For a detailed discussion of a breach of an international obligation by a cyber-related act, see rule 14 of Tallinn Manual 2.0 and commentary 2–11 thereto.
  3. ↑ Articles on State Responsibility, General commentary, para. 1.
  4. ↑ Statute of the International Court of Justice, of 26 June 1945, annexed to the UN Charter, Art 38(1)(a)–(c).
  5. ↑ Articles on State Responsibility, Art. 2, para. 10.
  6. ↑ Articles on State Responsibility, Art. 2, para. 9.

Bibliography and further reading

  • MN Schmitt (ed), Tallinn Manual 2.0 on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Operations (CUP 2017)
  • Etc.

External links

  • (...)
Retrieved from "https://cyberlaw.ccdcoe.org/wiki/Breach_of_an_international_obligation?oldid=165"