Rapid technological advancements are good for humanity, but they have also given rise to cyber terrorism, which is one of the most concerning worldwide issues. Due to the lack of uniform international treaties and international commitment and coordination, cyber terrorism has become a major concern. Cyber-attacks on sovereign states and their essential information infrastructures are becoming more common, necessitating a worldwide response. Regional and bilateral agreements, as well as local legislation, are insufficient to deter cyber-attacks. As a result, international law is an essential weapon for the international community to combat cyber threats in its many jurisdictions.
Existing solutions provided by current international treaties must be investigated first to examine potential responses to transnational cyber threats and develop a shared understanding of how to combat cyber-attacks. One of the most serious problems in combating cyber terrorism is a lack of international cooperation. These days, cyber terrorist attacks are frequently carried out across numerous states. However, prosecuting them is much more difficult. As a result, the targeted country will frequently use international courts of law to seek justice for the harm cyber-crime has caused.
Nations should develop self-regulatory legal structures to resist misuse of new technology, but these systems must be supported by international agreements and appropriate national legislation. Cyber terrorism should be investigated as an international crime by all nations. As a result of its international nature, cyber terrorism falls under universal jurisdiction, which is exercised through the power of multilateral organisations when a sufficient number of nations join them. If a substantial number of countries ratify a regional organisation, it can serve as a multilateral organization. The Council of Europe Convention on Cyber Crime, for example, has been approved by numerous countries (including the European Union) and is currently the only international convention against cybercrime.
A question of definition
There is no consensus about what constitutes "cyber terrorism." The definition of "cyber terrorism" has shifted from being extremely broad to being more specific. Many parts of large-scale cyber-attacks will be excluded and lost if a too-narrow definition is developed. On the other hand, if too-broad of a definition is decided upon, it will bring too many parts of cybercrime under the banner of cyber terrorism. Despite this challenge, there is some coherence among various definitions of cyber terrorism that could help us better address concerns around it. Dorothy Denning, an American information security researcher best known for her work on lattice-based access control, intrusion detection systems, and other cyber security innovations defines "cyber terrorism" as the fusion of terrorism and cyberspace. It is commonly understood to refer to "illegal attacks and threats of attacks against computers, networks, and the information stored therein, in order to frighten or force a government or its people in the pursuit of political and social goals." According to Denning's definition, the threat of cyber terrorism is recognized as having the same impact as a "normal" terrorist attacks.
International or universal jurisdiction
More serious offences are subject to universal jurisdiction. These crimes are subject to universal jurisdiction in two ways: first, because of the heinous nature and scope of the crime, which includes grave breaches of humanitarian law; and second, because of the insufficiency of legislation by the countries involved, these crimes are being committed in regions that are not under the jurisdiction of any state. Treaty regimes or customary international law can both give rise to universal jurisdiction. Treaty regimes bind the states that are signatories to them. They do, however, serve as evidence of customary international law in some circumstances. The principle of universal jurisdiction allows the international community to replace national law with international law in certain jurisdictions.
As a matter of customary international law, cyber terrorism is subject to universal jurisdiction. Opinions juris and state practice are examples of customary international law. Terrorism has been discussed in numerous treaties (state practice), and distinct varieties of terrorism have been recognised in a number of treaties. Finally, international organisations and their tribunals, such as the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice, which were established by the Rome Statute and the United Nations, respectively, must exercise universal jurisdiction in cyber terrorism cases.
To put it another way, international organisations provide a legal basis for exercising universal jurisdiction over cyber terrorism through treaties. Terrorism, in particular, is the exercise of universal jurisdiction by the global community rather than by states, despite the fact that universal jurisdiction can be exercised by both the international community and states. However, when it comes to adjudication, the global community takes precedence over national courts. Cyber terrorism is, in fact, a transnational and cross-border crime.
International treaty regulations give a legal basis for universal jurisdiction over cyberspace, but this condition also creates a variety of issues. The United Nations, Interpol, and the Council of Europe Convention on Cyber Crime are among these organisations.
As a result, only broad international agreement can help pave the way for success in the fight against cyber terrorism. Second, the lack of procedural rules for inquiry and prosecution prevents convictions. Multilateral cooperation requires countries to work together by putting efforts to combat cyber terrorism into perspective. Although there are numerous international organisations (multilateral, bilateral, and regional), multilateral organisations will be considered because, as previously stated, they provide the most effective methods for responding to transnational cybercrime and cyber terrorism, as the lack of an international response is a major issue in dealing with cyber terrorism.
Regional conventions try to offer a sustainable and legitimate framework for the fight against terrorism, taking into account the very real threat of terrorism and the flaws of multilateral treaties. At the national level, teamwork between the public and private sectors is emphasized in the response to cyber threats. The Council of Europe, the International Multilateral Partnership against Cyber Terrorism (IMPACT), the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) are among these organisations.
The International Telecommunications Union (ITU), a UN agency that is recognized as the "premier worldwide forum through which parties collaborate toward consensus on a wide range of issues impacting the future direction of the ICT industry," has launched a Global Cyber security Agenda, which is "a framework for international cooperation aimed at enhancing confidence and security in the information society." Five key pillars are identified in the ITU Global Cyber security Agenda: legislative, technical, organizational, capacity-building, and cooperation.
The legal pillar focuses on unified cyber security legislation and laws, as well as cyber-dependent and cyber-facilitated crimes. The technical pillar addresses current technical institutions, cyber security standards and protocols, and cyber security threat mitigation techniques. The organisational pillar contains cyber security organisational structures and policies, as well as relevant agencies for policy coordination. The capacity-building pillar encompasses initiatives to raise cyber security awareness, education, and training. 5. The cooperation pillar encompasses inter-agency and public-private partnerships, information sharing networks, and cooperative agreements. They are all part of the cooperation pillar.
Harmonising approaches
There is no unified strategy for combating the actions of cyber-terrorists and terrorist organisations on the Internet. However, there are several proposals on how to fight this threat. Because cyber terrorism cases are transnational in essence, only a wide international agreement and a global effort to criminalise terrorist attacks in all of their forms, carried out through the exercise of universal jurisdiction by international tribunals, can bring cyber terrorists to justice. It can also provide a functional legal framework that encompasses all concerns related to cyber terrorism
To respond to such types of transnational crime, countries must have a standard legal definition for the phrase "cyber terrorism." Legally identifying "cyber terrorism" based on its distinct characteristics facilitates not just the investigation process, but also international collaboration. Taken together, a bold approach is required to address the underlying difficulties that arise because of the global nature of cyber terrorism. The fundamental issue, according to the argument, is the need for a global and coordinated reaction to designate cyber terrorism as an international crime against humanity. Even though there are numerous related treaties, none of them establish a legally enforceable regulatory jurisdiction. Most of them are limited in scope and apply only at a regional level. At the international level, the United Nations and Interpol promote security and work to prevent and combat cybercrime. The Convention on Cyber Crime is the most important treaty in this case. Even though the Convention on Cyber Crime is classified as a regional effort in combatting cyber terrorism, it plays a significant role in this situation because a number of nations outside of its territory have ratified and joined the Convention. The most important pact in the sphere of cybercrime, however, excludes cyber terrorism.
As a result, it lacks personal and territorial jurisdiction. Both a comprehensive national cyber security strategy and a common understanding of the applicability of international law are essential to prepare nations for probable cyber incidents and to establish a firm foundation for international cooperation. Multilateral treaties have been proposed to be the most effective vehicles for harmonising national legal systems and coordinating the interpretation of prevailing international law, but global conversations regarding reaching such an accord appear to be at an early stage. Given the existing normative ambiguity surrounding international law in the context of cyber security, international cooperation between various actors is regarded as the cornerstone of efficient cyber threat responses.
The writer is a researcher and PhD scholar in the field of cyber security and cyber-crimes with a LLB and an M.Phil in information technology