To Örebro University

The use of technologies in situations of armed conflicts and belligerent occupation continues to lead to social and legal instabilities and aggravated violations. This panel highlights the issues pertaining to the status of Palestinians under Israeli AI-enhanced surveillance and their effects on fundamental rights. In doing so, this session will discuss the use of AI-enhanced systems to track Palestinians, systematizing massive surveillance and automating harsh restrictions to their rights and freedoms as part of a structural conduct of oppression. The session also discusses the role of social media platforms in facilitating digital control leading to authoritarian and genocidal surveillant assemblage, destruction of cyber infrastructure and data violence. This session, finally, explores the legality of such conduct under the applicable rules and norms of international law.

Departing from the notion of “cyber surveillance” in relation to control and settler colonialism - building on Elia Zureik's work, this session will highlight the main issues pertaining to the status of Palestinians under Israeli cyber surveillance and digital oppression, given the latest Israeli genocidal conduct in the Palestinian Territory. In doing so, this session will discuss the use of AI-enhanced systems to track Palestinians, systematizing massive surveillance and automating harsh restrictions to their rights and freedoms.

Additionally, the session will explore the role of social media platforms in facilitating cyber surveillance that has led to genocidal surveillant assemblage. The discussion will connect this conduct to resistance and cybersecurity issues. This session, finally, will explore the legality of such conduct under the applicable rules and norms of international law. The session brings together experts in the field to show how AI-enhanced surveillance is being deployed and misused in Palestine, whether through social media platforms, extensive physical presence of CCTV cameras, or the use of AI-enhanced systems, such as, automated drones and facial recognition technology.

The formation of cyber norms at the international level is a complex and evolving process that requires the coordinated efforts of cyber diplomats, legal experts, and policymakers. Key obstacles include the rapidly changing technological environment, rising technonationalisms, differing interpretations of international legal frameworks, and a fragmented normative landscape. This chapter outlines the intricate landscape of cyber norms formation. It does so by (i) retracing the crucial role of international law in this process by providing a framework for consensus and legitimacy; (ii) discussing the challenges cyber diplomats face in navigating the tension between normative expectations and binding law requirements; and (iii) exploring how this tension is manifested in the debate on the nexus between international cybersecurity and human rights across its fragmented normative landscape.

This post provides a brief legal assessment – within the provisions of the law of occupation – on Third States obligations to take measures against Israeli settler violence. In this post, I build on the study Violence and State Attribution: The Case of Occupied Palestine and the ICJ’s Advisory Opinion of July 2024 on Legal Consequences arising from the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem. I briefly discuss the legal basis on which Third States must prevent, stop and punish settler violence as a form of State atrocities. I argue that these sanctions imposed by a few countries are insufficient and misplaced. Additionally, they are redirecting State attributed internationally wrongful acts to a handful of individuals – designated as terrorists – while allowing the State itself to carry on and allowing such acts. 

Territorial annexation by force, whether takes the form of de facto or de jure, is unlawful. In its 2024 Advisory Opinion on Legal Consequences arising from the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (oPt), including East Jerusalem, the ICJ affirmed that both de facto annexation and du jure annexation of the oPt are equally unlawful. This blogpost discusses Israel’s plan to assert its sovereignty over and annex the oPt and the obligation of third states not to recognize such annexation in the light of the ICJ’s 2024 Advisory Opinion.

The Palestinian environment suffers destruction and degradation under the Israeli long-term military occupation. This chapter addresses three main points of discussion. First, it examines the Israeli practices, namely the destruction and exploitation of natural resources, land contamination and mismanagement of waste, as well as their impact on the Palestinian environment in the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt). Second, the chapter reviews customary and conventional provisions of international humanitarian law that may be applied to protect the environment in the oPt. It also studies related international principles embodied in the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development of 1992. Third, the chapter examines Israel’s responsibility under international law and points out possibilities and challenges in relation to the laws protecting the Palestinian environment. The chapter argues that the protection of the Palestinian environment is not sufficient under relevant international provisions. Thus, there is a need for clear and strict regulations to prevent environmental harm.

Cybersecurity has lately been a concern to international legal scholarship, especially when cyberoperations and cyber warfare are involved. It is well-established in international law that a cyber-attack is connected to the notions of ‘violence’ and ‘physical harm’ and refers to either the means of warfare or their effects in an operation causing violent effects. The violent effects also constitute an attack even if the means used to cause those effects are not violent. States have recognised that cyberoperations against critical infrastructure and critical information infrastructure supporting essential services to the public cause serious and devastating security, economic, social and humanitarian consequences – both in times of peace and conflicts. Thus, deploying the law of state responsibility is most appropriate to determine when and how States are responsible and must make full reparation for the injury caused by their wrongful act. This contribution to the panel Cybersecurity and the Politics of Repair: Infrastructures, Maintenance, and Materialities will discuss the peculiarities of repair in relation to damages done to cyber and physical infrastructures under international rules and norms, including restitution, compensation, satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition.

Automated administrative decisions (AADs) have been deployed in the public sector to increase efficiency and accessibility. However, AADs challenge the principles of the rule of law, particularly, the principle of legality (PoL). This chapter examines whether AADs are in compliance with the PoL. In order to adequately answer the question at hand, this chapter first discusses the PoL and its legal force. Secondly, it discusses AADs, their benefits and legal implications in relation to public administration. The chapter, finally, studies the entangled relationship between AADs and the PoL in the public sector and argues for the importance of upholding the PoL in the process of automated decisions made by public authorities.