The Research On The Legal Responsibility Concerning The Violation Of The State Sovereignty In Cyberspace

In recent years,the frequently occasion and enhancing severity of the large-scale cross-border cyber attack has become one of the major issues that bothers many countries and cause serious adverse impact on those countries,especially those targeted at a State's infrastructure.More and more countries have begun to realize the solution to the current situation cannot be ignored anymore,and the discussion of which is rising as well.As a core principle of international law,the principle of national sovereignty has been widely accepted by countries for its application in cyberspace.However,such support is mainly reflected in the jurisdictional control of domestic network-related matters,instead of from the perspective of international law.Countries do not give much attention to what constitutes the specific violation of other states' sovereignty,either.In fact,in order to establish a harmonious network environment and balance the interests of various countries in cyberspace,the discussion of the principle of sovereignty should not only remain on the surface,but must be further subdivided so as to facilitate the establishment of responsibility system in the internet field.One of the preconditions for the assumption of state responsibility is that there must be a prior act that violates international law.The methods that infringe upon the sovereignty of other countries,which are prohibitedby international law,mainly include the use or threat use of force and non-force intervention.The so-called violation of sovereignty by means of force or the threat of force can actually be regarded as the application of the principle of prohibition of force in cyberspace.The traditional use of force differs greatly from the cyber operation,and the effect they result in is also different.Therefore,when this principle is applied to cyberspace,it needs to be explained.The focus of this interpretation is on the possibility of cyber means achieving the threshold of military force.The conventional wisdom is that whether the use of force is closely related to the nature of the means employed,but with the development of international law,when discussing what kind of state action can be deemed as armed force,both international courts and national scholars are more supportive of focusing on the consequences of actions,rather than focusing on "mechanism." For a network operation or cyber attack that meets certain standards,a country can also take corresponding self-defense measures to defend its legal rights and interests.In the absence of the threat of force and force,cyber operation,if it constitutes“coercion” to other states' internal affairs,will also trigger violations of sovereignty.The increasingly close relationship between countries has kept the scope of a domestic affairs matter constantly updated.On this note,the most important thing is to combine the characteristics and specific circumstances of cyberspace and to explore what kind of issues can be controlled by a country.As far as network-related issues are concerned,a country's control over its domestic network infrastructure and network behavior,the formulation of its network strategy,and the development of relevant laws related to the Internet can all be classified as internal affairs.When it comes to cyber operations,it needs to analyze whether the operation has deprived other countries of the right to determine matters within sovereignty.It should be noted that for cyber operations that do not constitute armed attacks,although the injured country is unable to take self-defense,it can use self-remedies in the form of countermeasures.Like self-defense,the exercise of countermeasures has many preconditions,including procedural ones as well as substantive ones.Any violation of law is accompanied with responsibility,which is no exception under the regime of international law and the cyberspace.When the issue concerning the violation of international law is settled,the most important point is then to determine whether the act in question can be attributable to States.According to the Draft Articles of State Responsibilities,such attribution is divided into direct and indirect attribution.Direct Attribution refers to those activities which can be deemed as conducted by the State directly,while indirect attribution refers to the act that is conducted by a third party but is attributable to States for it is under the control or direction of a State in question.As for the cyberspace,taking into consideration of its special characteristics,it is relatively difficult when dealing with issues concerning the evidence and etc.To solve this dilemma,some scholars raise that the principle of due diligence can also be applied to cyberspace when a certain cyber operation cannot be attributed to the State definitely,such principle requires that the State of origin must take foreseeable measures to terminate the malicious cyber operations and prevent the damage it causes to other countries.Although such proposal is beneficial to the peaceful governance of internet to some extent,somehow it may utilized by some developed countries as a tool to achieve its own self interests in the absence of detailed operation guidance,thus it is quiet important to take the due diligence obligation in a very cautious way.