刘聪

• 1:武汉大学法学院

• 
  

摘要(Abstract)：

越来越多的国家认为审慎义务可以适用于网络空间，但对于如何履行网络空间审慎义务存在争议。审慎义务的性质取决于其所依附的主要国际法规则，而在当前网络领域，网络空间审慎义务依附于主权原则。根据“科孚海峡案”确立的审慎规则，在履行网络空间审慎义务之前，须满足以下四个方面的前置要求：知情、在一国领土内、侵犯他国权利和重大损害。在确立存在审慎义务的前提下，各国应在明确网络空间审慎义务所依附的主要规则的基础上，参考如下六个因素来履行审慎义务：合理、良好政府、对领土和非国家行为体的控制、风险程度、知道活动或潜在的风险和恶意或未采取措施。

关键词(KeyWords)：网络空间;审慎义务;知情;重大损害;《塔林手册2.0》

基金项目(Foundation):2020年国家社科基金重大项目“网络空间国际规则博弈的中国主张与话语权研究”(项目编号：20&ZD204);; 2021年国家社科基金青年项目“智能化武装行动国际规则的中国主张研究”(项目编号：21CGJ006)的阶段性成果

作者(Author):刘聪

参考文献(References)：

• [1]Michael N.Schmitt.In Defense of Due Diligence in Cyberspace [J].Yale Law Journal Forum,2015(125):68.

• [2]United Nations General Assembly.Report of the Group of Governmental Experts on Developments in the Field of Information and Telecommunications in the Context of International Security[EB/OL].[2023-02-05].http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/68/98.

• [3]United Nations General Assembly.Report of the Group of Governmental Experts on Developments in the Field of Information and Telecommunications in the Context of International Security[EB/OL].[2023-02-05].http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/70/174.

• [4][7][19][30][31][32][33]Talita Dias,Antonio Coco.Cyber Due Diligence in International Law[EB/OL].[2023-02-05].https://www.elac.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/finalreport-bsg-elac-cyberduediligenceininternationallawpdf.pdf.

• [5][15][20][21][34][41][42][43][44][48][49][50][51][52][53][56][58][60][61][62][72][73]Michael N.Schmitt (ed.).Tallinn Manual 2.0 on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Operations[M].New York:Cambridge University Press,2017:43,30,31,32,68,40-41,41-42,40,41,33-34,32-33,33,33,34,35-36,36-38,43,47,49,49-50,44-45,45.

• [6]Russell J.Buchan.Cyberspace,Non-State Actors and the Obligation to Prevent Transboundary Harm[J].Journal of Conflict & Security Law,2016(21):429-453.

• [8][17]Duncan French,Tim Stephens.International Law Association Study Group on Due Diligence in International Law[EB/OL].[2023-02-05].https://olympereseauinternational.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/due_diligence_-_first_report_2014.pdf.

• [9]United Nations.Alabama Claims Arbitration (United States/Great Britain)[EB/OL].[2023-02-05].https://legal.un.org/riaa/cases/vol_XXIX/125-134.pdf.

• [10]U.S.Report.United States v Arjona[EB/OL].[2023-02-05].https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep120/usrep120479/usrep120479.pdf.

• [11]United Nations.The Case of The S.S.‘Lotus’[EB/OL].[2023-02-05].http://www.worldcourts.com/pcij/eng/decisions/1927.09.07_lotus.htm.

• [12]United Nations.The Island of Palmas Case Arbitration[EB/OL].[2023-02-05].https://legal.un.org/riaa/cases/vol_II/829-871.pdf.

• [13][55]United Nations.Trail Smelter Arbitration (U.S.v.Canada)[EB/OL].[2023-02-05].https://legal.un.org/riaa/cases/vol_III/1905-1982.pdf.

• [14][39][40][45][46][47]International Court of Justice.Corfu Channel Case[EB/OL].[2023-02-05].https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/1/001-19490409-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf.

• [16]Timo Koivurova,Krittika Singh.Due Diligence[EB/OL].[2023-02-05].http://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e1034 rskey=G9zKY1&result=1&prd=EPIL.

• [18]International Law Commission.Draft Articles on Prevention of Transboundary Harm from Hazardous Activities[EB/OL].[2023-02-05].https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/commentaries/9_7_2001.pdf.

• [22]李浩培.国际法的概念和渊源[M].贵阳：贵州人民出版社，1994:104-105.

• [23]王铁崖.国际法引论[M].北京：北京大学出版社，1998:99.

• [24]廖焕国.注意义务与大陆法系侵权法的嬗变：以注意义务的功能为视点[J].法学，2006(6):28.

• [25]陈璇.注意义务的规范本质与判断标准[J].法学研究，2019(1):138.

• [26]廖焕国.侵权法上注意义务比较研究[M].北京：法律出版社，2008:12.

• [27]高建学.过失侵权的注意义务研究[D].北京：对外经贸大学，2006.

• [28]董春华.论侵权法中注意义务的“一般性”[J].中国政法大学学报，2020(2):130.

• [29]易军.“法不禁止皆自由”的私法精义[J].中国社会科学，2014(4):121.

• [35]Eric Talbot Jensen,Sean Watts.A Cyber Duty of Due Diligence:Gentle Civilizer or Crude Destabilizer [J].Texas Law Review,2017(95):1555.

• [36][63]Tim Stephens,Duncan French.ILA Study Group on Due Diligence in International Law[EB/OL].[2023-02-05].https://docplayer.net/34722822-Ila-study-group-on-due-diligence-in-international-law-second-report-july-tim-stephens-rapporteur-and-duncan-french-chair.html.

• [37][38]Neil McDonald.The Role of Due Diligence in International Law[J].International and Comparative Law Quarterly,2019(68):1044,1048.

• [54]OECD.OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (OECD Guidelines)[EB/OL].[2023-02-05].https://www.oecd.org/daf/inv/mne/48004323.pdf.

• [57]International Law Commission.Draft Articles on Prevention of Transboundary Harm from Hazardous Activities,with commentaries[EB/OL].[2023-02-05].https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/commentaries/9_7_2001.pdf.

• [59]International Court of Justice.United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran[EB/OL].[2023-02-05].https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/64/064-19800524-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf.

• [64][75]International Court of Justice.Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v.Uruguay)[EB/OL].[2023-02-05].https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/135/135-20100420-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf.

• [65]UN Human Rights Council.Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights:Implementing the United Nations “Protect,Respect and Remedy” Framework[EB/OL].[2023-02-05].https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Publications/Guiding Principles Business HR_EN.pdf.

• [66]Eric de Brabandere.“Host States” Due Diligence Obligations in International Investment Law[J].Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce,2015(42):319.

• [67]Alwyn.V.Freeman,Responsibility of States for Unlawful Acts of Their Armed Forces[J].Recueil de Cours de l’ Academie de Droit international de La Haye,1955(2):277-278.

• [68]United Nations.Rio Declaration on Environment and Development[EB/OL].[2023-02-05].https://cil.nus.edu.sg/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/1992-Rio-Declaration-on-Environment-and-Development.pdf.

• [69][70][76]International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.Seabed Mining Advisory Opinion[EB/OL].[2023-02-05].https://www.itlos.org/fileadmin/itlos/documents/cases/case_no_17/17_adv_op_010211_en.pdf.

• [71]International Law Commission.Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts with commentaries[EB/OL].[2023-02-05].https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/commentaries/9_6_2001.pdf.

• [74]International Court of Justice.Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v.Serbia and Montenegro)[EB/OL].[2023-02-05].https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/91/091-19960711-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf/.

• (1)该报告是牛津网络空间国际法保护进程(The Oxford Process on International Law Protections in Cyberspace,“牛津进程”)的重要成果。该进程是布拉瓦尼克政府学院牛津道德、法律和武装冲突研究所(The Oxford Institute for Ethics,Law and Armed Conflict,ELAC)的一项倡议,于2020年5月与微软合作启动。