Neutrality Law in the Age of Digitalization: An Analysis of the Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Mellisa Towadi, Zamroni Abdussamad, A. Bajrektarević, Lisnawaty W Badu, Waode Mustika
{"title":"Neutrality Law in the Age of Digitalization: An Analysis of the Russia-Ukraine Conflict","authors":"Mellisa Towadi, Zamroni Abdussamad, A. Bajrektarević, Lisnawaty W Badu, Waode Mustika","doi":"10.15294/lesrev.v7i1.61763","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article aims to describe the application of the concept of neutrality law in the current era with the contamination of digitalization. The main problem refers to the intervention of third countries or neutral states in the Russian conflict v. Ukraine, then questioned the existence of neutrality law in the era of digitalization. The method used is a normative juridical method with a statute approach analyzed qualitatively and descriptively. The results show that validity is needed in determining the attitude of third countries or neutral states that intervene with belligerents (Russia/Ukraine). The determination of the validity is based on the scale of the intervention provided by the third country. Validity refers to the 1907 Hague Convention and the UN Charter, which generally outlines violations of territorial sovereignty and international law. So, in conclusion, the concept of open access, broad and immeasurable digitalization, cannot be avoided in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. This does not necessarily become a justification because the essence of the principle of neutrality and intervention is very different; the two cannot be combined unless a violation of international law indicates one. So basically, neutrality law can no longer be the primary regulation to control the attitude of a neutral state but requires new norms that shape the attitude of a neutral state so that it can be used as international customary law.","PeriodicalId":292299,"journal":{"name":"Lex Scientia Law Review","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lex Scientia Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15294/lesrev.v7i1.61763","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article aims to describe the application of the concept of neutrality law in the current era with the contamination of digitalization. The main problem refers to the intervention of third countries or neutral states in the Russian conflict v. Ukraine, then questioned the existence of neutrality law in the era of digitalization. The method used is a normative juridical method with a statute approach analyzed qualitatively and descriptively. The results show that validity is needed in determining the attitude of third countries or neutral states that intervene with belligerents (Russia/Ukraine). The determination of the validity is based on the scale of the intervention provided by the third country. Validity refers to the 1907 Hague Convention and the UN Charter, which generally outlines violations of territorial sovereignty and international law. So, in conclusion, the concept of open access, broad and immeasurable digitalization, cannot be avoided in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. This does not necessarily become a justification because the essence of the principle of neutrality and intervention is very different; the two cannot be combined unless a violation of international law indicates one. So basically, neutrality law can no longer be the primary regulation to control the attitude of a neutral state but requires new norms that shape the attitude of a neutral state so that it can be used as international customary law.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
数字化时代的中立法:对俄乌冲突的分析
本文旨在描述在数字化污染的当今时代中立性法律概念的应用。主要问题是指第三国或中立国介入俄乌冲突,进而质疑数字化时代中立性法律的存在。所使用的方法是一种规范性的法律方法,采用定性和描述性分析的法规方法。结果表明,在确定与交战国(俄罗斯/乌克兰)进行干预的第三国或中立国的态度时,需要有效性。有效性的确定是基于第三国提供干预的规模。有效性指的是1907年《海牙公约》和《联合国宪章》,它们概括了侵犯领土主权和国际法的行为。因此,总而言之,在俄罗斯和乌克兰的冲突中,开放获取、广泛和不可估量的数字化的概念是无法避免的。这并不一定成为正当理由,因为中立原则和干预原则的本质是非常不同的;这两者不能混为一谈,除非有违反国际法的迹象。所以基本上,中立法不再是控制中立国家态度的主要规则,而是需要新的规范来塑造中立国家的态度,这样它就可以被用作国际习惯法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Positivization of Fatwas of the National Sharia Council of the Indonesian Ulema Council in the Sharia Banking Law: Problems and Challenges Land Subsidence Policy in the Context of Good Governance Principles (Comparing Indonesia and Japan) Investor-State Dispute Settlement Mechanism in Vietnam’s New Generation Free Trade Agreements – Challenges and Recommendations Rejection of Former Shia Community in Sampang Perspective on Human Rights Law: Discourse of Religious Rights and Freedom in Indonesia Comparative Analysis Between Employees Provident Fund (EPF) & Private Retirement Scheme (PRS) in Malaysia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1