The aim of the proposed by scientific-educational group research is to develop scientific provisions revealing the essence of axiological, substantial and structural changes that are happening or will predictably occur in public international law due to the increasing pace of development and implementation of information technologies in various spheres of society.
Already seemed to conclude that these changes affect the fundamental principles of public international law. Firstly, by illustrating the flaws of the established doctrinal approaches, they force to re-evaluate the viability of the legal positivism (legal formalism) approach regarding the correlation of the existing legal norms, on the one hand, and values, on the other. Secondly, it is precisely in the field of international relations that the tendencies of deformalization and the so-called “privatization” of international lawmaking are clearly manifested, which prompts to re-evaluate and, possibly, even to abandon the dualistic customary for international lawyers: law – not law, presence – absence of legal force or law - “soft law”. Thirdly, these processes and tendencies bring actors and players of a different plan to the forefront, albeit without canceling, but seriously casting doubt on the normative patterns of the Westphalian system. Hereof, the proposed project title “Reshaping Public International Law in the Age of Cyber: Values, Norms, and Actors” reflects the concept of public international law as getting over serious axiological, substantial and structural changes due to comprehensive development and implementation of information technologies in all spheres of society.
The influence of the development of information technologies on public international law is multifaceted, therefore, the proposed project is planned to focus the attention of the research team on three areas that are substantively different but nonetheless intersect.
The first area concerns the use of computer technology to influence and interfere in the affairs of other states (this activity is commonly called “cyber-operations” or “cyber-attacks”). It is the public international law that acts as the normative basis for assessing the legitimacy or unlawfulness of such interventions and, subsequently, for the application by the affected states of retaliatory measures, including prosecution.
The second problem area presents a real challenge to the current framework of public international law in general, and Human rights law in particular, and is associated with the introduction of mass electronic surveillance systems on citizens by many states.
The third area is related to the changes that public international law will have to undergo due to the introduction of technologies based on the use of autonomous robotic systems and artificial intelligence, both for military purposes and in peacetime.
In this way, the research aim is to develop scientific provisions revealing the essence of axiological, substantial and structural changes that are happening or will predictably occur in public international law due to the increasing pace of development and implementation of information technologies in various spheres of society.
The methodology that will be the basis of this scientific project is to evaluate international legal doctrines and legal norms using tools that go beyond the legal positivism (legal formalism) approaches to international law, by referring to the achievements of such methodological schools as a critical theory of law, structuralism, economic analysis of law (game theory, behaviorism). In addition, the research will apply the provisions developed in the framework of such regulatory and methodological approaches as “global administrative law” and “constitutionalism” (a constitutionalist understanding of public international law).
The scientific-educational group consists of three mentor scientists and six young researchers. The working language of the scientific-educational group is English.
Statement of the scientific problem:
The research planned by the scientific-educational group is aimed at developing scientific provisions that reveal the essence of axiological, substantive and structural changes that occur or will predictably occur in public international law in connection with the ever-increasing speed of development and implementation of information technologies in various spheres of society life.
Already seemed to conclude that these changes affect the fundamental principles of public international law. Firstly, by illustrating the flaws of the established doctrinal approaches, they force to rethink the correctness of the approach imposed by positivism (formalism) on the correlation of existing legal norms, on the one hand, and values, on the other. Secondly, it is precisely in the field of international relations that the tendencies of deformalization and the so-called “privatization” of international lawmaking are clearly manifested, which prompts us to re-evaluate and, possibly, even abandon the dyads customary for international lawyers: right – not right, presence – absence of legal force or law - “soft law”. Thirdly, these processes and tendencies bring actors and players of a different plan to the forefront, albeit without canceling, but seriously casting doubt on the normative patterns of the Westphalian system. Hence, the proposed name of the project - “Reshaping Public International Law in the Age of Cyber: Values, Norms and Actors” is a reflection of the idea of public international law as experiencing serious axiological, substantial and structural shifts in connection with the comprehensive dissemination and penetration of information technology in all spheres of society life.
The influence of the development of information technologies on public international law is multifaceted, therefore, within the framework of the proposed project of the SEG it is planned to focus the attention of the research team on three areas that are substantively different but nonetheless intersect.
The first area concerns the use of computer technology to influence and interfere in the affairs of other states (this activity is commonly called “cyberoperations” or “cyberattacks”). It is public international law that acts as the normative basis for assessing the legitimacy or unlawfulness of such intervention and, subsequently, for the application by the affected states of retaliatory measures, including prosecution.
Most of the issues related to the lawfulness and legal consequences of cyberoperations are on the plane of public international law. Despite the relevance of this topic, international legal science has not yet proposed justified and methodically verified approaches to cyberattacks, having not made much progress after resolving the issue of the fundamental applicability of existing norms of international law to cyberoperations to solving the equally important question of how exactly the existing rules should act in the so-called "cyberspace."
This is due to the fact that the first wave of scientific research concerned almost exclusively a military model of using and countering cyberoperations. So, perhaps the most well-known analytical legal material - the first edition of the Tallinn Manual, prepared under the auspices of NATO in 2013, was devoted to the application of international law to the "cyber warfare." However, most of the known cyberoperations did not reach the minimum threshold level that would qualify them as a “use of force” and even more so an “armed attack”, which gives the right to self-defense, and therefore, jus contra bellum rules are not applicable to such operations, these operations themselves do not give rise to an “armed conflict”, which does not allow to apply international humanitarian law to them (provided, of course, that these operations are not carried out in the context of international or non-international armed conflict). The second edition of the Tallinn Manual published in 2017 included these types of operations, but despite the existence of formulated rules, commentary on them clearly demonstrates the lack of consensus among the involved experts, even on the most fundamental issues.
Cyberoperations that fall outside the scope of jus contra bellum received the name of “low-intensity cyberoperations” in the scientific literature. It should be noted that, using international legal terminology, it is more correct to speak about cyberoperations that cannot be qualified as acts of “use of force” within the meaning of paragraph 4 of Article 2 of the UN Charter. The prevalence of precisely this type of operation among all cases of “cyberattacks” discussed in public space makes us turn to the international legal concept of sovereignty, as well as to the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of other states, putting on the agenda the need for fundamental scientific research related to the use of sovereignty and the international legal principle of non-interference as key concepts in building a strategy to counter cyber threats. Thus, the specific characteristics of the so-called “cyberspace” make us rethink the most basic components of international legal doctrines and norms, including their content and scope, as well as their normativity, transformability and effectiveness.
The second problem area, which the study of SEG will be devoted to, presents a real challenge to the current framework of public international law in general, and Human Rights law in particular, and is associated with the introduction of mass electronic surveillance systems for citizens by many states.
In this context, on September 13, 2018, the European Court of Human Rights ruled a judgement on Big Brother Watch and Others v. The United Kingdom, in which it essentially legalized the use of this measure by the Council of Europe member states. This decision is still subject to revision by the Grand Chamber of the Court, nevertheless, it raises questions whether the Human rights law is an adequate tool that can be used to protect privacy from the already ubiquitous surveillance.
Many authors who have examined the applicability of the Human Rights law in the digital era, both before and after the ECtHR has ruled in the Big Brother Watch case, assume that electronic “mass surveillance” per se is not a violation of international legal obligations of states on protection of the right to privacy and freedom of expression. However, marginalizing the idea of the possibility of recognizing the illegality of the use of "mass surveillance" in the light of human rights as, using M. Koskenniemi’s well-known dichotomy, exclusively "utopian", we may not notice the gradual transformation of states into dystopia. The ECtHR, of course, is not the only body that has the competence to verify compliance with human rights, but it cannot be ruled out that its decisions on the cases of Centrum för Rättvisa and Big Brother Watch will affect the position of the Court of the European Union to one degree or another. The position of the UN Human Rights Committee, as well as the UN Special Rapporteurs, with all its critical attitude to "mass surveillance", is offset by the lack of binding force of decisions or voiced approaches. In addition, the long awaited new General Comment on Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights has still not been adopted. Finally, the protection afforded to citizens of democracies by their constitutions may not be sufficient. In addition, even if the “mass surveillance” programs really exclude citizens of their state, constitutional protection may turn out to be illusory, because it cannot be forgotten that “we are all foreigners”: the ban on mass surveillance of own citizens can be easily bypassed through cooperation with special services of other states.
The third area, which the research project of the SEG will be devoted to, is related to the changes that public international law will have to undergo due to the introduction of technologies based on the use of autonomous robotic systems and artificial intelligence, both for military purposes and in peacetime.
The use of these systems and technologies in military conditions, firstly, calls into question the application of the norms of international humanitarian law (international law of armed conflicts), because their essence is built on the use of the “man-man” model. Secondly, the laconicism and level of generalization inherent in key norms of international humanitarian law (prohibition of attacks on civilians, the concept of direct participation in hostilities) make them practically non-algorithmizable, i.e. not convertible to computer code mode. Thirdly, the use of the Internet significantly erodes the norms of international humanitarian law tied primarily to the territory (land, water, air) relating to the theater of war, as well as neutrality.
Herewith, in a number of areas the use of artificial intelligence is considered as a potential tool for accelerating progress towards a decent life in peace. The scope of advanced technologies is not limited to economic growth, including the multidimensional “sustainable development”, within which human rights and economic growth, social equality and environmental protection are integrated. Currently, hundreds of applications based on the use of artificial intelligence are helping to reduce extreme poverty, improve the quality of health and welfare, promote education, increase social and economic equality, improve living standards in urban agglomerations, as well as protect the environment, conserve natural resources and prevent natural disasters. The rise of artificial intelligence solutions and applications with a high social effect can contribute to the demise of authoritarian regimes and repressive governments, increase transparency of power, strengthen the rule of law and the control exercised by civil society. Although artificial intelligence can make life easier, it also causes many problems, including bias, poor quality decision making, mass surveillance, poor transparency, lack of accountability, job loss, discrimination and inequality, and even harmful and malicious use. Artificial intelligence applications can easily be turned into a powerful anti-democratic tool that allows the widespread dissemination of xenophobic propaganda, fake news and calls that incite hostility and hatred, as well as contribute to cyber terrorism and repression. All these aspects of the application of "high technology" require special reflection in the context of public international law.
The main hypotheses put forward in the three areas of the research project indicated above can be summarized as follows:
1. The principle of sovereign equality of states and the principle of non-interference in matters related to the internal competence of states have their own legal normativeness in international law, but their content, coupled with problems evidence and attribution of the so-called “cyberoperations” do not allow them to act as effective instruments not only of deterrence, but also of the ground for states’ responsibility.
2. Human Rights law retains its potential for countering infringements of privacy, possessing both internal and external resources, which makes it possible to resist, firstly, using the reference to the defense of national security as an “indisputable trump card”, second, the so-called consensus of the Big Brothers (the emerging trend for states to introduce mass surveillance systems for citizens), and, thirdly, the formation of a new social norm on the admissibility of surveillance.
3. There is a transformation of the international legal regulatory environment applicable to artificial intelligence towards ad hoc regulation, the use of “soft law” instruments, as well as self-regulation. In addition to shifts in understanding the subjective composition of norm-setting activities, this brings such values as human rights, the rule of law and democracy to the forefront, forcing to reconsider the correctness of positivistic views on the possibilities of international law in this area.
As was noted in the application, reshaping of Public International Law in the age of cyber happens in many directions and this research project is intended to cover three of them. Each of these directions or areas has undoubted relevance.
With regard to the first area, connected with the use of information technology and the Internet for the purposes of imposing hostile influence or for intervention in the internal affairs of other states (with the so-called “cyber operations” or “cyber attacks”), it is already apparent that the use of new technologies allows to cause damage, comparable or even greater in scope than the use of kinetic weapons.
Among the most famous and even “textbook” cases of cyber attacks, are attack on the Estonian government websites in 2007, as well as hacker attacks on Georgian government websites in 2008, the use of the “Stuxnet” program against Iranian nuclear facilities in 2009, cyber operation against the largest US banks in 2012, cyber attack on South Korean banks and television stations in 2013, attack on the film company “Sony” carried out in 2014 by a hacker group called “Peace Guards”, data theft from servers Democratic Party in the United States in 2016 and spreading of "extortion virus» NotPetya in 2017, which targeted financial institutions and companies in 64 countries. News feeds from news agencies are full with reports of ever-newer cyber attacks.
Publically-available cybersecurity strategies of most Western countries, as well as China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, refer to sovereignty or the principle of non-interference in internal affairs. Group of Governmental Experts on Developments in the Field of Information and Telecommunications in the Context of International Security, created under auspices of UN, in 2015 report, also emphasized that principle of sovereignty is a basis for enhancing security in the sphere of state-used information and communication technologies. A reference to sovereignty and the principle of non-interference permeates socio-political, diplomatic and legal discourse.
The exponential growth of relevance of this international legal concept is connected to active process of formation of the state practice in this relatively new field. As an example we can point out that several years ago China announced its strategic aim to become a “cyber power”. One of the elements of that is to strengthen China’s role in creating a common legal architecture.
These processes make it necessary to conduct a scientific research on the use of sovereignty and the principle of non-interference in internal affairs as key concepts in building a strategy to counter cyber threats.
It is also relevant to conduct research in the second area, which relates to the study of Human Rights law as a potential instrument for protecting privacy in the context of emerging of mass electronic surveillance systems by states.
Starting from 2001 both public opinion and the position of the Council of Europe and the European Union towards the legality of “mass surveillance” have changed on several occasions. The new change was grounded in E. Snowden’s exposures made in 2013. Those revelations opened eyes of many to the scale of electronic surveillance programs. It started both political and legal attempts to hold the government accountable and formed a public demand for, if not prohibition, then for significant reduction and limitation of the ability to intercept data. However, due to the fact that since 2015 a wave of terrorist acts has swept across Europe, the public opinion has swung in the other direction. Many states hurried to use that in order to adopt relevant legislation in order to regulate and, on the one hand, limit and, on the other hand, to legalize mass interception of data at the domestic level.
As a matter of example, in France, almost immediately after the terrorist attacks in Paris on November 30 of 2015 the Law on Measures for Tracking International Electronic Communications was passed. It allows to intercept all messages sent abroad or received abroad, and to store messages content for one year and metadata for six years. On December 23 of 2016 the Federal Law on the Interception of Foreign Communications which regulates surveillance of foreign citizens was adopted in Germany. In 2016 amendments to Swiss law which significantly broadened the ability to establish mass surveillance were put to a referendum and was approved by 65.5% of its participants. In the same year amendments were made to the Polish Police Act and some other acts governing the use of covert surveillance. As is known, the so-called the “Yarovaya package”(“Yarovaya law”), which consists of amendments to a number of laws, including Criminal and Criminal Procedure Codes of the Russian Federation, was adopted in 2016 and entered into force almost in full. The purpose of the amendments is introduction of a system of mass interception and storage of message content and metadata.
Additionally, the Big Brother Watch case, mentioned in the application, is currently pending before the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights. One can only speculate about whether the Grand Chamber will decide to change the approach to assessing the legitimacy of mass surveillance as such, but the dispute once again emphasizes that this issue is very difficult and has tremendous resonance.
Finally, the relevance of the third area of the study, devoted to assessing the changes that public international law will be forced to undergo because of the introduction of technologies based on the use of autonomous robotic systems and artificial intelligence, is also beyond doubt.
In recent years, artificial intelligence, deep learning machines, neural networks and predictive models have become the key part in the global economy, acting as a catalyst of fundamental changes and launching the “fourth industrial revolution.” It can be argued that to some extent these technologies mimic the processes of human intelligence. Artificial intelligence usually processes a large amount of data and metadata necessary to obtain knowledge and information (learning process), independently develops and uses this information to make an approximate or definite conclusion and perform a specific task. In particular, the so-called machine learning and deep learning are fully autonomous decision-making systems that self-select data and interact with other advanced technologies without the need for human intervention.
By 2030 artificial intelligence will produce products which cost is currently estimated at up to 15.7 trillion dollars. Artificial intelligence and machine learning applications are already part of our daily lives. Virtual voice assistants, such as Siri, Alexa or Alice, as well as business assistants, such as IBM Watson, Amazon Recognition, Google AI, Pravoved.ru help in our work, accelerate the completion of our projects and facilitate social interaction. In 2017 Russian President Vladimir Putin stated; “Artificial Intelligence is the future not only for Russia, but for all of humanity,” adding that a country that will become a leader in the field of artificial intelligence “will become the ruler of the world.” Currently, China and the United States are the two leaders who have invested billions of dollars in this sector and are funding research, technology hub, startups, ecosystems and infrastructure.
Currently, Canada, China, Denmark, Finland, France, India, Italy, Japan, Mexico, the North Baltic countries, the Russian Federation, Singapore, South Korea, Sweden, Taiwan, the UAE and the United Kingdom have developed strategies to promote the use and development of artificial intelligence. However, only a few states have adopted a special law aimed at defining and regulating this instrument (USA, Korea and Japan, at the same time Germany and the State of Nevada have adopted special legislation relating to autonomous vehicle testing). Little effort has been made at the global or regional level: the EU has recently adopted the “Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence”, the Council of Europe has published the “Guidelines on Artificial Intelligence and Data Protection” in January, and the OECD adopted its “Principles on Artificial Intelligence” in May 2019. OECD “Principles...” are the first international standards agreed upon by the governments of 42 countries for the responsible management of trustworthy AI. Under the auspices of the UN, the Center for Artificial Intelligence and Robotics aimed to monitor the development of AI and robotics and the “AI for Good” platform, which aims to study the impact of AI on sustainable development were created.
All aforementioned proves the relevance and prospects of the chosen field of research of studying public international law and information technology in their interrelation.
The goal of the research is to develop scientific positions revealing the essence of axiological and structural changes that are happening and will predictably occur in public international law due to the increasing pace of development and implementation of information technologies in various spheres of life.
Research objectives include following:
- discover the content and normativity of the international legal concept of sovereignty and the principle of non-intervention in internal affairs of states by virtue of international treaties, customs, acts of international organizations, as well as court decisions;
- identify and evaluate the evolving state practice of the application of the international legal concept of sovereignty and the principle of non-intervention in internal affairs of states on the so-called “Cyberspace”;
- analyze not only of the presence and dynamics of changes, but also the ability of international legal principles and norms to transform in response to new challenges in the use of information and communication technologies in general;
- apply various interdisciplinary methodologies to assess and predict the effectiveness of using public international law to counter cyber threats;
- estimate the possibility of international human rights law to act as an adequate tool to protect the right to privacy in the context of the modern “panopticon”;
- identify ways and forms of transformation of the international legal regulatory environment applicable to artificial intelligence;
- evaluate the shifts in understanding the subjective composition of international rule-making in the field of the use of artificial intelligence;
- determine the potential of the axiological approach to the formation of the content of international law that relate to the use of autonomous robotic systems and artificial intelligence.
General and special scientific methods will be comprehensively applied throughout the research. It includes such general theoretical methods as the method of analysis and synthesis, abstraction, concretization, generalization, formalization, induction and deduction, idealization, analogy and modeling. In addition, it is expected to apply the method of dialectical materialist philosophy and a systematic approach. Among the special methods that will be used in this study, it is necessary to indicate the methods of formal-legal, comparative-legal and historical-legal analysis, as well as legal modeling and prediction.
The main empirical method that will be the basis of scientific research is the method of examining and summarizing of experience. This method will be applied to decisions of international organizations, international judicial and quasi-judicial bodies, national courts, as well as in the analysis of approaches to regulating cyber-attacks at the national level. Based on the project profile, in the proposed study the provisions of the humanities and social sciences will be combined with the basics of computer science, biotechnology and scientific and technical knowledge.
The originality and novelty of the methodology that will be the basis of this scientific project is to evaluate international legal doctrines and norms using tools that go beyond the positivist (formalist) approaches to international law, by referring to the achievements of such methodological schools as a critical theory of law, structuralism, economic analysis of law (game theory, behaviorism). In addition, the research will apply the provisions developed in the framework of such methodological approaches as “global administrative law” and “constitutionalism” (a constitutionalist understanding of public international law).
This approach allows to achieve two goals. On the one hand, relying on historical-legal, formal-legal and comparative-legal methods, to reveal the content, scope, approaches to the interpretation of international legal concepts, as well as to track the dynamics of changes that are important for the formation of international legal customs as in the state practice caused by the emergence of new in their characteristics of relations and objects, and in the recognition of this practice as mandatory (opinio juris). However, the application of these methods is - with all its advantages and disadvantages - "criticism from the inside."
The use of the results obtained purely by legal methods is only sufficient for the framework of the dispute resolution bodies. Given the lack of a centralized judicial system and compulsory jurisdiction among existing international courts that have the competence to adjudge interstate disputes, this possibility becomes extremely narrow.
The materials analyzed in the proposed scientific study will, firstly, consist of the main sources of international law: international treaties and customs that determine the operation of the principle of sovereign equality of states, the principle of non-intervention in internal affairs, regulating the use of force between states, human rights, jurisdiction, as well as the international legal responsibility of states and standards of proof. Secondly, subsidiary means for determining the rules of international law: decisions of international judicial and quasi-judicial bodies, key decisions of national courts, scientific works, including the Tallinn Manual (2013 and 2017 eds.) on the international law applicable to cyber operations as an example of the most authoritative collective expert work. Thirdly, the provisions of “soft law”: decisions of international organizations and reports created under their expert groups. Fourth, identification of individual states’ position requires special attention, which will be achieved by access to domestic legal acts (laws, regulations and by-laws), judicial decisions, parliamentary acts, as well as documents defining the strategy and doctrines of protection against cyber threats, as well as the use of artificial intelligence.
The approach in this scientific project allows one to go beyond the framework of legal formalism and analyze the normativity, ability to change (transformability) and the effectiveness of international legal doctrines and norms using the general methodology, provisions and developments of constructivism (D. Meyer, N. Onuf, F. Kratochwil), including “Critical school” (D. Kennedy, M. Koskenniemi, A. Orford), as well as “game theory” (D. Baird, R. Gertner, R. Picker), rational choice (A. Guzman) and economic analysis of law (R. Posner). This allows to reach the level of “criticism from the outside”, which is necessary when formulating scientific guidelines that can be applied to the activities of various actors.
This area of scientific research, which consists of application to the legal norms, phenomena and institutions of an interdisciplinary scientific approaches, is especially pronounced in the USA, however, recent publications devoted to the analysis of the methodology of international law (The Oxford Handbook of the Theory of International Law / Ed. by A. Orford. Oxford University Press: 2016; International Law Theories: An Inquiry into Different Ways of Thinking, Oxford University Press: 2016; Aspremont, Jean d'. Epistemic Forces in International Law: Foundational Doctrines and Techniques of International Legal Argumentation. Cheltenham. Edward Elgar Publishing: 2015) prove the increasing recognition of those approaches around the world.
The planned research is expected to achieve a number of results, the contents of which are as follows:
- clarification of the conceptual framework related to the use of international legal doctrines, norms and principles useful to counter cyber-threats;
- identification of the formal legal content and scope of international legal norms and principles (based on international treaties, travaux préparatoires, international custom, United Nations General Assembly resolutions, and decisions of international dispute settlement bodies), including sovereignty, the principle of non-interference in internal affairs, the right to privacy, the right to personal data protection, jurisdiction and attribution, as well as applicable standards of proof;
- identification of the relationship between the principle of the sovereign equality of States and the principle of non-intervention in domestic affairs, the prohibition of the threat or use of force and the fundamental rights and duties of the State, and assessing whether the concept of sovereignty has its own legal normativity in international law;
- identification of the dynamics of changes in State practice and opinio juris relevant to the transformation of international custom governing the content and scope of public international law in the so-called "cyberspace";
- assessment of the capacity of international legal doctrines, norms and principles to change in response to new challenges in the use of information and communication technologies;
- application of various methods to assess and predict the effectiveness of the use of international human rights law for the protection of privacy;
- identification of changes in the structure and content of the international regulatory framework applicable to the use of information technologies (including artificial intelligence and autonomous robotic systems);
- scientific substantiation of the scope and limits of the transformational potential of international human rights law and international humanitarian law in the face of the application of modern technologies in information acquisition and processing, AI and autonomous weapons.
The scientific significance is predetermined by the fact that, firstly, public international law is "on the forefront" of the confrontation between a state and cyber-threats and is itself in a zone of great turbulence (in some aspects - even on the verge of survival), requiring increased attention, detailed and multidimensional study and forecasting of changes.
Secondly, neither the formal legal (positivist) nor exclusively political science research as well as a combination of the results of such scientific works, allow reaching the results that are supposed to be achieved by applying the idea described in this scientific project. The originality of this idea is to evaluate the international legal doctrine, norms and principles identified through the legal formalism, using tools that go beyond the scope of the discipline itself and partly lie in the sphere of other social and political sciences (including "critical theory," "game theory," the rational choice theory and the economic analysis of law). This idea is novel and in this form has not yet been embodied in scientific works and publications in the field of application of international law to new information and communication technologies.
Thirdly, the research project was originally designed to build on existing scientific developments in the field of application of public international law in the context of the development of information technologies and to go further towards the need to understand the boundaries of existing legal doctrines and ongoing processes of transformation, which are clearly not limited to a set of changes in existing norms or changes in their interpretation, but concern the essential elements of all public international law, its meta-basis.
The practical application of the research results may be taken into account by the public authorities when forming or adjusting their overall strategy of building the line of conduct in the context of the use of information and communication technologies both in international relations and in the relations existing in the State – person paradigm.
Equally, the result may be used by the public authorities in drafting procedural documents filed to national, international judicial and quasi-judicial bodies. These bodies, in turn, may refer to published works by members of the research group as expert materials serving as a subsidiary means for establishing the content of legal norms and clarifying legal approaches.
In addition, the results may be applied to further research as well as used for educational purposes to develop lecture courses on public international law, international humanitarian law, international human rights law, international criminal law and other disciplines.
Have you spotted a typo?
Highlight it, click Ctrl+Enter and send us a message. Thank you for your help!
To be used only for spelling or punctuation mistakes.