A Rechtsgutstheorie Lens on the Legal Aspects of the States’ Cyber Interest Concept

Objective: to show the evolution of the state interests concept and its application in cyberspace, where it turns out to be fundamental for the development of state military policy aimed at protecting national interests.

Methods: the research is based on the intersection of the theory of law and the concept of cyber interests of the state through the prism of the theory of legitimate interests (Rechtsgutstheorie). The latter was originally developed within the criminal law science, but with prospects for studying the concept of state interests in cyberspace. The application of the theory of legitimate interests made it possible to study the state cyber interests concept and determine its legal classification and applications. In particular, the theory of legitimate interests in this study is used to explore the legal perspectives of the concept of state interests in cyberspace as interests subject to legal protection.

Results: it is determined that in the dynamic landscape of cyberspace, there are multifaceted interests of states related to national security, economic prosperity, sovereignty and diplomacy. To ensure their protection, states initiate strategies that generate a variety of political and legal consequences in international relations. This fact determines the importance of studying the concept of state interests from a legal viewpoint, as well as their legal status and consequences. Parallels are drawn between the concept of protected legal interests within the theory of legitimate interests and cyber interests that states seek to protect. The theory requires balancing the competing interests; hence, its applicability to the actions of the state in cyberspace is considered. The obstacles are identified, that hinder applying the theory of legitimate interests to cyberspace, including difficulties of attribution, damage thresholds and the need for global consensus. The author shows the evolution of the concept of state interests, which determines the possibility of its application in cyberspace, where it serves the purposes of developing state policy aimed at protecting national interests.

Scientific novelty: it is expressed in the reflection of the theory of legitimate interests to the formation of the legal concept of cyber interests of the state, which serves as a sufficient justification for the protection of specific cyber interests.

Practical significance: the main conclusions outlined in the article can be used to identify cyberspace interests subject to legal protection (such as confidentiality, data integrity, sovereignty, and economic stability). They may also improve legal mechanisms for protecting national interests in cyberspace, ensure uniformity of relevant international judicial practice, and improve the efficiency and quality of state policy management in cyberspace in order to ensure security and peaceful coexistence.

1. Abdelkarim, Y. A. (2024). A Literature Review of the Evolution of Sovereignty and Borders Concepts in Cyberspace. International Cybersecurity Law Review, 5, 365–372. https://doi.org/10.1365/s43439-024-00118-0

2. Ambos, K. (2015). The Overall Function of International Criminal Law: Striking the Right Balance Between the Rechtsgut and the Harm Principles: A Second Contribution Towards a Consistent Theory of ICL. Criminal Law and Philosophy, 9, 301–329. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11572-013-9266-1

3. Atadjanov, R. (2019). Humanness as a Protected Legal Interest of Crimes Against Humanity: Conceptual and Normative Aspects. TMC Asser Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-299-6

4. Bidasolo, M. C. (2023). Is It Possible to Limit the Penal Intervention in the Twenty-First Century? In E. C. Demetrio et al. (Eds.), Crisis of the Criminal Law in the Democratic Constitutional State, Legal Studies in International, European and Comparative Criminal Law (Vol. 6, pp. 3–16). Springer Nature Switzerland AG. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13413-5_1

5. Cox, L. (2021). Nationalism: Themes, Theories, and Controversies. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-9320-8

6. de la Cuerda Martín, M. (2023). The Impact of Soft Law on the Expansion of Criminal Law. In E. C. Demetrio et al. (Eds.), Crisis of the Criminal Law in the Democratic Constitutional State, Legal Studies in International, European and Comparative Criminal Law (Vol. 6, pp. 231–249). Springer Nature Switzerland AG. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13413-5_13

7. Fang, B. (2018). Cyberspace Sovereignty: Reflections on Building a Community of Common Future in Cyberspace. Science Press and Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0320-3

8. Foulon, M., & Meibauer, G. (2024). How cyberspace affects international relations: The promise of structural modifiers. Contemporary Security Policy, 45(3), 426–458. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2024.2365062

9. Huntington, S. (1997). The Erosion of American National Interests. Foreign Affairs, 76(5), 28–49. https://doi. org/10.2307/20048198

10. Lanz, J. G. (2023). The Attack on the Protected Legal Interests: A Criminalisation Principle and an Element of the Criminal Offence. Ius Novem, 17(3), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.2478/in-2023-0019

11. McLean, I., & McMillan, A. (2009). The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics (3 ed.). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acref/9780199207800.001.0001

12. Metea, I. (2020). National Interest: Terminology and Directions of Approach. In International Conference Knowledge-Based Organization, 26(1), 75–79. https://doi.org/10.2478/kbo-2020-0011

13. Olha, M. (2024). The Concept of Effectiveness of Ensuring the Rights and Legal Interests of a Person in Pretrial Criminal Proceedings. Visegrad Journal on Human Rights, 1, 56–63. https://doi.org/10.61345/1339-7915.2024.1.9

14. Onditi, F. (2023). Introduction: Diplomatic Thought and Practice. In F. Onditi et al. (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Diplomatic Thought and Practice in the Digital Age. (pp. 1–31). Springer Nature Switzerland AG. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28214-0_1

15. Reiterer, M. (2022). EU Cyber Diplomacy: Value- and Interest-Driven Foreign Policy with New Focus on the Indo-Pacifc. In G. Boulet, M. Reiterer, & R. P. Pardo (Eds.). Cybersecurity Policy in the EU and South Korea from Consultation to Action. New Security Challenges (pp. 17–39). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08384-6_2

16. Thomas, A. J. (2023). The Open World Ethos. In The Open World, Hackbacks and Global Justice (pp. 15–36). Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8132-6_2

17. Tianyang, L. (2024). The Embodiment and Practice of the Principle of Legal Interest Protection in Criminal Legislation. International Journal of Frontiers in Sociology, 6(3), 44–50. https://doi.org/10.25236/ ijfs.2024.060308

18. Topor, L. (2024). Sovereignty, Power, International Security and a Lack of International Law. In Cyber Sovereignty. Global Power Shift (pp. 45–73). Springer Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-58199-1_3

19. Wang, P. (2022). Principle of Interest Politics: Logic of Political Life from China’s Perspective. Peking University Press. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-3963-1

20. Wilenmann, J. (2019). A New Legal Science with an Old Aftertaste. The University of Toronto Law Journal, 69(4), 540–556. https://doi.org/10.3138/utlj.2019-0057