View source for Scenario 17: Collective responses to cyber operations

==== Obligation to respect the sovereignty of other States ====
{{#lst:Sovereignty|Definition}}
<b>[L9]</b> This analysis proceeds on the basis that the obligation to respect the sovereignty of another State is a rule of international law applicable to cyberspace. Accordingly, under the test proposed by the Tallinn Manual, sovereignty is breached – among other grounds – when a cyber operation either causes a loss of functionality of cyber infrastructure (option 3 above) or interferes with or usurps inherently governmental functions (option 4).<ref>[https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316822524 Tallinn Manual 2.0], commentary to rule 4, paras 15-18.</ref> The ransomware attacks <b>(incident 1)</b> resulted in severe losses of functionality of the targeted systems. Public hospitals, transportation and governmental services were not able to function properly, which resulted in further financial losses. Moreover, the functioning of the courts is an inherently governmental function (i.e., the administration of justice). Therefore, the effects on governmental services amounted to an interference with inherently governmental functions of State A.<ref>[https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316822524 Tallinn Manual 2.0], commentary to rule 4, paras 15-18.</ref> 

<b>[L10]</b> In conclusion, on the “sovereignty-as-rule” approach, State B’s actions would have violated the obligation to respect State A’s sovereignty in cyberspace.