Refine
Document Type
- Contribution to online periodical (5) (remove)
Language
- English (5)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (5) (remove)
Keywords
- Völkerrecht (5) (remove)
For centuries, export control regulations have accompanied the development of new weapon technologies. The revelations of the ‘Pegasus Project’ have put the question of whether and how to regulate the export of the new technology ‘cyberweapons’ in the limelight: Is the current international export control law up to the challenge of sufficiently regulating the proliferation of ‘cyberweapons’ or does it need an update? To answer this question, the blog post will, first, turn to the definition and relevance of ‘cyberweapons’. Secondly, international export control law is introduced as a possible measure to mitigate the risks posed by ‘cyberweapons’ against the backdrop of regulating the use of ‘cyberweapons’ or establishing a moratorium on its trade. Third, the blog post will assess the export of ‘cyberweapons’ in general and the export of Pegasus in particular within the current international export control framework. The current framework seems to touch upon partial aspects of the trade with ‘cyberweapons’. However, it stands to fear that it is not up to the task of sufficiently curtailing the proliferation of ‘cyberweapons’ and the associated risks, as it especially leaves the underlying problem of the trade with zero-day vulnerabilities untouched.
Whether sovereign rights under the Convention on the Continental Shelf and the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone were conferred on the nation state or the nation’s constituent states.
Whether the states of a federation had international personality, or only the federation itself.
Two different States licensed exports of intrusion tools and related items to a third State. That State then used it to spy on human rights defenders, lawyers, journalists, activists, opposition politicians, and dissidents. While one of the licensing States is a member of the Wassenaar Arrangement, the other is not but had declared to follow it unilaterally. The legal analysis considers the attribution of the relevant acts and omissions by the States and examines possible breaches of international export control law and international human rights law.
Whether a person who worked as an ‘expert on mission’ for the United Nations outside his home state was acting as an ‘official’ for the United Nations within the meaning of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations and was, therefore, exempt from taxation by his home state.