Suchergebnisse

Cyber has been around for over a decade and yet we are still faces with a situation of a very weak or rather no regulation. This is being heavily influenced by our weak technological development and due to the nature of cyberspace and the Internet. Cyber warfare poses interesting questions for us. It is one of a kind type of warfare, the one we cannot see or feel, but it's impacts are instantaneous and potentially devastating. States and scholars agree on that. This thesis attempts to explore possibilities of application of existing international laws to amend this situation and answer the questions if it is adequate or at all possible. While scholars are still arguing about the basics of what cyber warfare and cyberspace actually is, it keeps on evolving. States on the other hand have recognized the potential threat of cyber warfare a long time ago and are attempting to mend the existing legal void, however not successfully. The effects of their efforts are limited only to a small number of States. States who are not willing to give up their cyber capability would also stay clear from such international legislation. International treaties and State practice were analyzed in search of a way to accommodate cyber warfare under the current regime. The findings show that application of existing legal basis to cyber warfare is at best difficult and strained. The reality is that cyber warfare does not fit adequately under any of the legal umbrellas at the moment. Application of existing laws generates even more drawbacks than it in the end covers. There is potential for future development however. States are inclined to negotiate and, even as we speak, are attempting at creation of a cyber warfare regulating treaty. The thesis concludes that current international law is not adequate in order to be applicable to cyber warfare and even in areas where it can afford minimal protection, potential for abuse exists. The criteria and standards which were appropriate to conventional warfare and armed conflict are outdated. At least a global understanding on the terms used to define cyber warfare and related terms would be a good starting point. A universally accepted convention would be the perfect solution.

Cyber has been around for over a decade and yet we are still faces with a situation of a very weak or rather no regulation. This is being heavily influenced by our weak technological development and due to the nature of cyberspace and the Internet. Cyber warfare poses interesting questions for us. It is one of a kind type of warfare, the one we cannot see or feel, but it's impacts are instantaneous and potentially devastating. States and scholars agree on that. This thesis attempts to explore possibilities of application of existing international laws to amend this situation and answer the questions if it is adequate or at all possible. While scholars are still arguing about the basics of what cyber warfare and cyberspace actually is, it keeps on evolving. States on the other hand have recognized the potential threat of cyber warfare a long time ago and are attempting to mend the existing legal void, however not successfully. The effects of their efforts are limited only to a small number of States. States who are not willing to give up their cyber capability would also stay clear from such international legislation. International treaties and State practice were analyzed in search of a way to accommodate cyber warfare under the current regime. The findings show that application of existing legal basis to cyber warfare is at best difficult and strained. The reality is that cyber warfare does not fit adequately under any of the legal umbrellas at the moment. Application of existing laws generates even more drawbacks than it in the end covers. There is potential for future development however. States are inclined to negotiate and, even as we speak, are attempting at creation of a cyber warfare regulating treaty. The thesis concludes that current international law is not adequate in order to be applicable to cyber warfare and even in areas where it can afford minimal protection, potential for abuse exists. The criteria and standards which were appropriate to conventional warfare and armed conflict are outdated. At least a global understanding on the terms used to define cyber warfare and related terms would be a good starting point. A universally accepted convention would be the perfect solution.

Dissertation analyses the institution of professional self-government in Lithuanian public law. In Lithuanian legal system self-government organizations should be considered as the expression of civil society, where the state power is decentralized to a certain extent and the right to deal with a number of important issues is granted to citizens. Professional self-government organizations are among the most interesting forms of self- government, which, however, has been the least studied in the Lithuanian legal doctrine. Therefore, they do not have clearly defined (or reconstructed) legal traditions. Professional self-government organizations face new challenges, such as constant change in regulation of their activities, imposed obligations to respect the principle of responsible governance and to ensure freedom of fair competition, and initiatives to restrict and even abolish their right to self-government. The research covers the following aspects: relationship of professional self-government with other forms of self-government, constitutional status of professional self- government, properties defining professional self-government, bodies implementing professional self- government, organizational structure of professional self-government, functions exercised by professional self-government and its financing, the relationship between professional self-government and state institutions, as well as the elements specific to the legal status of professional self-government.

Dissertation analyses the institution of professional self-government in Lithuanian public law. In Lithuanian legal system self-government organizations should be considered as the expression of civil society, where the state power is decentralized to a certain extent and the right to deal with a number of important issues is granted to citizens. Professional self-government organizations are among the most interesting forms of self- government, which, however, has been the least studied in the Lithuanian legal doctrine. Therefore, they do not have clearly defined (or reconstructed) legal traditions. Professional self-government organizations face new challenges, such as constant change in regulation of their activities, imposed obligations to respect the principle of responsible governance and to ensure freedom of fair competition, and initiatives to restrict and even abolish their right to self-government. The research covers the following aspects: relationship of professional self-government with other forms of self-government, constitutional status of professional self- government, properties defining professional self-government, bodies implementing professional self- government, organizational structure of professional self-government, functions exercised by professional self-government and its financing, the relationship between professional self-government and state institutions, as well as the elements specific to the legal status of professional self-government.

Dissertation analyses the institution of professional self-government in Lithuanian public law. In Lithuanian legal system self-government organizations should be considered as the expression of civil society, where the state power is decentralized to a certain extent and the right to deal with a number of important issues is granted to citizens. Professional self-government organizations are among the most interesting forms of self- government, which, however, has been the least studied in the Lithuanian legal doctrine. Therefore, they do not have clearly defined (or reconstructed) legal traditions. Professional self-government organizations face new challenges, such as constant change in regulation of their activities, imposed obligations to respect the principle of responsible governance and to ensure freedom of fair competition, and initiatives to restrict and even abolish their right to self-government. The research covers the following aspects: relationship of professional self-government with other forms of self-government, constitutional status of professional self- government, properties defining professional self-government, bodies implementing professional self- government, organizational structure of professional self-government, functions exercised by professional self-government and its financing, the relationship between professional self-government and state institutions, as well as the elements specific to the legal status of professional self-government.

Dissertation analyses the institution of professional self-government in Lithuanian public law. In Lithuanian legal system self-government organizations should be considered as the expression of civil society, where the state power is decentralized to a certain extent and the right to deal with a number of important issues is granted to citizens. Professional self-government organizations are among the most interesting forms of self- government, which, however, has been the least studied in the Lithuanian legal doctrine. Therefore, they do not have clearly defined (or reconstructed) legal traditions. Professional self-government organizations face new challenges, such as constant change in regulation of their activities, imposed obligations to respect the principle of responsible governance and to ensure freedom of fair competition, and initiatives to restrict and even abolish their right to self-government. The research covers the following aspects: relationship of professional self-government with other forms of self-government, constitutional status of professional self- government, properties defining professional self-government, bodies implementing professional self- government, organizational structure of professional self-government, functions exercised by professional self-government and its financing, the relationship between professional self-government and state institutions, as well as the elements specific to the legal status of professional self-government.

Dissertation analyses the institution of professional self-government in Lithuanian public law. In Lithuanian legal system self-government organizations should be considered as the expression of civil society, where the state power is decentralized to a certain extent and the right to deal with a number of important issues is granted to citizens. Professional self-government organizations are among the most interesting forms of self- government, which, however, has been the least studied in the Lithuanian legal doctrine. Therefore, they do not have clearly defined (or reconstructed) legal traditions. Professional self-government organizations face new challenges, such as constant change in regulation of their activities, imposed obligations to respect the principle of responsible governance and to ensure freedom of fair competition, and initiatives to restrict and even abolish their right to self-government. The research covers the following aspects: relationship of professional self-government with other forms of self-government, constitutional status of professional self- government, properties defining professional self-government, bodies implementing professional self- government, organizational structure of professional self-government, functions exercised by professional self-government and its financing, the relationship between professional self-government and state institutions, as well as the elements specific to the legal status of professional self-government.

Dissertation analyses the institution of professional self-government in Lithuanian public law. In Lithuanian legal system self-government organizations should be considered as the expression of civil society, where the state power is decentralized to a certain extent and the right to deal with a number of important issues is granted to citizens. Professional self-government organizations are among the most interesting forms of self- government, which, however, has been the least studied in the Lithuanian legal doctrine. Therefore, they do not have clearly defined (or reconstructed) legal traditions. Professional self-government organizations face new challenges, such as constant change in regulation of their activities, imposed obligations to respect the principle of responsible governance and to ensure freedom of fair competition, and initiatives to restrict and even abolish their right to self-government. The research covers the following aspects: relationship of professional self-government with other forms of self-government, constitutional status of professional self- government, properties defining professional self-government, bodies implementing professional self- government, organizational structure of professional self-government, functions exercised by professional self-government and its financing, the relationship between professional self-government and state institutions, as well as the elements specific to the legal status of professional self-government.

Dissertation analyses the institution of professional self-government in Lithuanian public law. In Lithuanian legal system self-government organizations should be considered as the expression of civil society, where the state power is decentralized to a certain extent and the right to deal with a number of important issues is granted to citizens. Professional self-government organizations are among the most interesting forms of self- government, which, however, has been the least studied in the Lithuanian legal doctrine. Therefore, they do not have clearly defined (or reconstructed) legal traditions. Professional self-government organizations face new challenges, such as constant change in regulation of their activities, imposed obligations to respect the principle of responsible governance and to ensure freedom of fair competition, and initiatives to restrict and even abolish their right to self-government. The research covers the following aspects: relationship of professional self-government with other forms of self-government, constitutional status of professional self- government, properties defining professional self-government, bodies implementing professional self- government, organizational structure of professional self-government, functions exercised by professional self-government and its financing, the relationship between professional self-government and state institutions, as well as the elements specific to the legal status of professional self-government.

Dissertation analyses the institution of professional self-government in Lithuanian public law. In Lithuanian legal system self-government organizations should be considered as the expression of civil society, where the state power is decentralized to a certain extent and the right to deal with a number of important issues is granted to citizens. Professional self-government organizations are among the most interesting forms of self- government, which, however, has been the least studied in the Lithuanian legal doctrine. Therefore, they do not have clearly defined (or reconstructed) legal traditions. Professional self-government organizations face new challenges, such as constant change in regulation of their activities, imposed obligations to respect the principle of responsible governance and to ensure freedom of fair competition, and initiatives to restrict and even abolish their right to self-government. The research covers the following aspects: relationship of professional self-government with other forms of self-government, constitutional status of professional self- government, properties defining professional self-government, bodies implementing professional self- government, organizational structure of professional self-government, functions exercised by professional self-government and its financing, the relationship between professional self-government and state institutions, as well as the elements specific to the legal status of professional self-government.

This master thesis provides an analysis of the legality of preemptive self-defence under international law. In assessing the lawfulness of preemptive self-defence two basic sources of international law: customary and treaty law are examined. The analysis of the UN Charter rules showed that there is strong disagreement between scholars regarding the legality of anticipatory self-defence. However, the term "armed attack" in article 51 UN Charter should embrace imminent threats. Two basic reasons are: the advent of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and new methods of warfare; the inherent right of anticipatory self-defence was not exhausted after the adoption of the UN Charter. The examination of customary international law showed that the Caroline doctrine allows states to act in anticipation of an armed attack if the requirements of necessity and proportionality are fulfilled. In addition, the analysis of state practice and opinion juris prior and after September 11, 2001, revealed that anticipatory self-defence is not prohibited. The conclusion is maid that the right of anticipatory self-defence, if requirements of necessity and proportionality are fulfilled, is not illegal under international law. In contrast, the analysis of the UN Charter rules showed that preemptive self-defence against perceived threats is not legal under the UN Charter, because there is no actual armed attack or imminent threat against which state can legally defend itself. In addition, preemptive use of military force against emerging threats has no safeguards. The examination of customary law prior and after September 11, 2001, revealed that a new rule, which would allow states to use military force in self-defence, was not created, because there is a lack of opinio juris and state practice. The conclusion is drawn that preemptive use of force is not legal under international law.

This master thesis provides an analysis of the legality of preemptive self-defence under international law. In assessing the lawfulness of preemptive self-defence two basic sources of international law: customary and treaty law are examined. The analysis of the UN Charter rules showed that there is strong disagreement between scholars regarding the legality of anticipatory self-defence. However, the term "armed attack" in article 51 UN Charter should embrace imminent threats. Two basic reasons are: the advent of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and new methods of warfare; the inherent right of anticipatory self-defence was not exhausted after the adoption of the UN Charter. The examination of customary international law showed that the Caroline doctrine allows states to act in anticipation of an armed attack if the requirements of necessity and proportionality are fulfilled. In addition, the analysis of state practice and opinion juris prior and after September 11, 2001, revealed that anticipatory self-defence is not prohibited. The conclusion is maid that the right of anticipatory self-defence, if requirements of necessity and proportionality are fulfilled, is not illegal under international law. In contrast, the analysis of the UN Charter rules showed that preemptive self-defence against perceived threats is not legal under the UN Charter, because there is no actual armed attack or imminent threat against which state can legally defend itself. In addition, preemptive use of military force against emerging threats has no safeguards. The examination of customary law prior and after September 11, 2001, revealed that a new rule, which would allow states to use military force in self-defence, was not created, because there is a lack of opinio juris and state practice. The conclusion is drawn that preemptive use of force is not legal under international law.

This master thesis provides an analysis of the legality of preemptive self-defence under international law. In assessing the lawfulness of preemptive self-defence two basic sources of international law: customary and treaty law are examined. The analysis of the UN Charter rules showed that there is strong disagreement between scholars regarding the legality of anticipatory self-defence. However, the term "armed attack" in article 51 UN Charter should embrace imminent threats. Two basic reasons are: the advent of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and new methods of warfare; the inherent right of anticipatory self-defence was not exhausted after the adoption of the UN Charter. The examination of customary international law showed that the Caroline doctrine allows states to act in anticipation of an armed attack if the requirements of necessity and proportionality are fulfilled. In addition, the analysis of state practice and opinion juris prior and after September 11, 2001, revealed that anticipatory self-defence is not prohibited. The conclusion is maid that the right of anticipatory self-defence, if requirements of necessity and proportionality are fulfilled, is not illegal under international law. In contrast, the analysis of the UN Charter rules showed that preemptive self-defence against perceived threats is not legal under the UN Charter, because there is no actual armed attack or imminent threat against which state can legally defend itself. In addition, preemptive use of military force against emerging threats has no safeguards. The examination of customary law prior and after September 11, 2001, revealed that a new rule, which would allow states to use military force in self-defence, was not created, because there is a lack of opinio juris and state practice. The conclusion is drawn that preemptive use of force is not legal under international law.

The topic of the paper is the principle of self-determination of peoples in international law and the limits of its implementation. The aim of the paper is to analyze and evaluate theoretical and practical aspects of regulation and implementation of the principle of self-determination of peoples. In the first part of the paper we examine the evolution of the principle in international law. The origin of the principle of self-determination of peoples is connected with the American and French revolutions in late XVIII century and the idea that government derives from the will of people. After the First World War the principle became the ideal of USA president Woodrow Wilson and it was used in redrawing the map of Europe, its practical application was inconsistent though. Since the dismemberment of European empires and the creation of the new national states were based on economic interests, historical claims and strategic calculations we can think of the principle of self-determination of peoples till the Second World War as the political declaration only. The principle of self-determination of peoples got the status of the right of international law under the regime of United Nations in the context of decolonization. Though the formulation of the principle in the Charter of United Nations is abstract, its content is clarified by the resolutions of the General Assembly. The scope of the principle was revised after the Cold War. It became obviously that the right of self-determination overstep the limits of decolonization and the questions about the holders of the right and the right of unilateral secession were raised. In the second part of the paper we analyze the scope of the principle of self-determination of peoples. The principle can be divided into "internal" and "external" self-determination. The former means the right of people to determine its political and economical regime. Civil and political rights claimed by international instruments are the guarantees of the "internal" self-determination. The "external" self-determination means the right of the people to determine its international status and is connected with the problem of the claim to secede. The right of secession does not exist in the instruments of international law, but it is not forbidden either. That is why in some cases it can be justified. The restriction of the right of self-determination is directly connected with the principle of territorial integrity. "External" self-determination, which influences the boundaries of a territory, does not contradict the principle of the territorial integrity if it is implemented by the people, which is the holder of the right of self-determination. In the context of the principle of self-determination a people means an entire population of particular territorial union. It is questionable whether the recognition of the right to unilateral secession would eliminate the ethnic conflicts; the respect to human rights and the preservation of identity of peoples should be a key to the future peace of multinational states.

The topic of the paper is the principle of self-determination of peoples in international law and the limits of its implementation. The aim of the paper is to analyze and evaluate theoretical and practical aspects of regulation and implementation of the principle of self-determination of peoples. In the first part of the paper we examine the evolution of the principle in international law. The origin of the principle of self-determination of peoples is connected with the American and French revolutions in late XVIII century and the idea that government derives from the will of people. After the First World War the principle became the ideal of USA president Woodrow Wilson and it was used in redrawing the map of Europe, its practical application was inconsistent though. Since the dismemberment of European empires and the creation of the new national states were based on economic interests, historical claims and strategic calculations we can think of the principle of self-determination of peoples till the Second World War as the political declaration only. The principle of self-determination of peoples got the status of the right of international law under the regime of United Nations in the context of decolonization. Though the formulation of the principle in the Charter of United Nations is abstract, its content is clarified by the resolutions of the General Assembly. The scope of the principle was revised after the Cold War. It became obviously that the right of self-determination overstep the limits of decolonization and the questions about the holders of the right and the right of unilateral secession were raised. In the second part of the paper we analyze the scope of the principle of self-determination of peoples. The principle can be divided into "internal" and "external" self-determination. The former means the right of people to determine its political and economical regime. Civil and political rights claimed by international instruments are the guarantees of the "internal" self-determination. The "external" self-determination means the right of the people to determine its international status and is connected with the problem of the claim to secede. The right of secession does not exist in the instruments of international law, but it is not forbidden either. That is why in some cases it can be justified. The restriction of the right of self-determination is directly connected with the principle of territorial integrity. "External" self-determination, which influences the boundaries of a territory, does not contradict the principle of the territorial integrity if it is implemented by the people, which is the holder of the right of self-determination. In the context of the principle of self-determination a people means an entire population of particular territorial union. It is questionable whether the recognition of the right to unilateral secession would eliminate the ethnic conflicts; the respect to human rights and the preservation of identity of peoples should be a key to the future peace of multinational states.