The US may be permitted to intervene if a set of events has consequences for and effects within the US. In our context, such a connection would – if at all – be possible only in accordance with the effects doctrine. However, international law does allow for the extraterritorial exercise of public authority if there is a connection to the state. In Switzerland, it is illegal if somebody exercises acts on Swiss territory that would normally be acts of public authority. State-initiated wiretapping is an act of public authority. Another principle that could be affected is the distribution of state authority.Īs a general rule, a state is bound to its territory when it comes to the exercise of public authority. If public officials can’t have a confidential phone conversation anymore, this aspect of the sovereignty principle in international law is being violated. The internal communication between politicians, public officials and state authorities is part of those internal affairs. One facet of state sovereignty provides for non-interference in internal affairs.
These practices may infringe on general principles of international law, such as the principle of state sovereignty. Is there an indicator in international law that these practices are illegal? The states know that spying is problematic. Likewise, just because all countries are spying, you cannot conclude that there is a rule of customary international law that allows them to do so. Wiretapping is not per se regulated by international law there is no explicit rule that prohibits espionage.
Is it against international law to spy on mobile phone conversations of foreign heads of government?
0 kommentar(er)
