Skip to main content

Spying and International Law

By
With increasing numbers of foreign governments officially objecting to now-widely publicized U.S. espionage activities, the topic of the legality of these activities has been raised both by the target governments and by the many news organizations reporting on the issue.  For those interested in better understanding this controversy by learning more about international laws concerning espionage, here are some legal resources that may be useful.

The following is a list of multinational treaties relevant to spies and espionage:
  • Brussels Declaration concerning the Laws and Customs of War (1874).  Although never ratified by the nations that drafted it, this declaration is one of the earliest modern examples of an international attempt to codify the laws of war.  Articles 19-22 address the identification and treatment of spies during wartime.  These articles served mainly to distinguish active spies from soldiers and former spies, and provided no protections for spies captured in the act.
  • The Hague Convention (II): Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land (1899).  This treaty was primarily concerned with the rules of military engagement, and only addressed espionage occurring during wartime.  Article 24 acknowledged the use of “ruses of war” and “methods necessary to obtain information” about the enemy army and nation; while not legalizing espionage.  Articles 29-31 address the identification and treatment of spies during wartime; these articles provided for spies captured in the act to receive a trial, but offered no further protection.
  • The Hague Convention (IV): Respecting the Laws and Customs of War (1907).  This treaty retained in its annex the espionage provisions of Convention (II), in identically numbered articles.
  • Geneva Convention (IV): Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (1949).  This treaty is concerned with the treatment of captured civilians during wartime.  Article 5 addresses the treatment of persons detained as spies, providing that captured spies could be denied privileges that would permit spies to reveal damaging information, but otherwise requiring the same protection for spies as for other prisoners; in context, this article prohibits the treatment of espionage (by the enemy) in wartime as a capital offense.
  • The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961).  This treaty is concerned with the privileges of a diplomatic mission while in a foreign country.  Article 22 protects the premises of the mission from invasion, Article 24 outlaws both forcible and covert examination of the archives and documents of a diplomatic mission, and Articles 27 and 40 protects mission communications from being monitored; articles 30, 36 and 40 extend these guarantees of privacy to an official diplomat’s private residence and property.  This agreement is one of the earliest instances of nations placing legal limits on their own espionage activities.
  • The Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (1963).  This treaty is concerned with extending to consulates many of the privileges and protections enjoyed by diplomats.  Articles 27 and 31 protect the premises of the consulate, Articles 33 and 61 protect its documents (with some restrictions), Articles 35 and 54 protect its communications, and Articles 50 and 54 protect the personal bags of consular employees and their families from customs inspection while travelling.
  • Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (1994) (TRIPS).  An annex to the Marrakesh Agreement establishing the World Trade Organization, TRIPS is concerned with the protection of intellectual property.  Article 39 requires the protection of trade secrets, but Article 73 exempts national governments from following TRIPS for any reason they consider essential to their security interests; effectively, TRIPS prohibits private corporate espionage.
The following is a list of academic legal studies available online; readers may find them useful in explaining why so little of what is considered spying is illegal under international law, and why there is often conflict between international and domestic laws concerning espionage:
  • Craig Forcese, Spies Without Borders: International Law and Intelligence Collection, 5 J. NAT'L SECURITY L. & POL'Y 179 (2011), available from the Journal of National Security Law and Policy website.
  • A. John Radsan, The Unresolved Equation of Espionage and International Law, 28 MICH. J. INT'L L. 595 (2007), available from the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) website. 
  • Glenn Sulmasy & John Yoo, Counterintuitive: Intelligence Operations and International Law, 28 MICH. J. INT'L L. 625 (2007), available from SSRN.
  • Simon Chesterman, The Spy Who Came In from the Cold War: Intelligence and International Law, 27 MICH. J. INT'L L. 1071 (2006), available from SSRN.
  • Roger D. Scott, Territorially Intrusive Intelligence Collection and International Law, 46 A.F. L. REV. 217 (1999), available from the Air Force JAG website.
  • David P. Fidler, Economic Cyber Espionage and International Law: Controversies Involving Government Acquisition of Trade Secrets through Cyber Technologies. 17 ASIL Insights, no. 10 (2013), available from the American Society of International Law website.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Amazing, but True, Deportation Story of Carlos Marcello

By
Earlier this week, the University of Houston Law Center was fortunate to have as its guest Professor Daniel Kanstroom of Boston College of Law. An expert in immigration law, he is the Director of the International Human Rights Program, and he both founded and directs the Boston College Immigration and Asylum Clinic. Speaking as the guest of the Houston Journal of International Law’s annual Fall Lecture Series, Professor Kanstroom discussed issues raised in his new book, Aftermath: Deportation Law and the New American Diaspora . Professor Michael Olivas introduced Professor Kanstroom to the audience, and mentioned the fascinating tale of Carlos Marcello, which Professor Kanstroom wrote about in his chapter “The Long, Complex, and Futile Deportation Saga of Carlos Marcello,” in Immigration Stories , a collection of narratives about leading immigration law cases. My interest piqued, I read and was amazed by Kanstroom’s description of one of the most interesting figures in American le...
1 comment
Read more

Texas Subsequent History Table Ceases Publication

By
This week, Thomson Reuters notified subscribers that publication of the Texas Subsequent History Table will be discontinued and no further updates will be produced, due to “insufficient market interest.” Practitioners have been extracting writ (and since 1997, petition) history from the tables since their initial publication in 1917 as The Complete Texas Writs of Error Table . The tables, later published by West, have been used for nearly a century to determine how the Texas Supreme Court or Court of Criminal Appeals disposed of an appeal from an intermediate appellate court. The purpose of adding this notation to citations is to indicate the effect of the Texas Supreme Court’s action on the weight of authority of the Court of Appeals’ opinion.  For example, practitioners may prefer to use as authority a case that the Texas Supreme Court has determined is correct both in result and legal principles applied (petition refused), rather than one that simply presents no error that requ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Lessons for Today from the Genocide Against the Tutsi in Rwanda

By Anonymous
“Man’s inhumanity to man is not only perpetrated by the vitriolic actions of those who are bad. It is also perpetrated by the vitiating inaction of those who are good.” –Martin Luther King Jr.   Last week, I had the pleasure of attending  Professor Zachary D. Kaufman ’s presentation on  Lessons for Today from the Genocide Against the Tutsi in Rwanda  hosted by the  Johannesburg Holocaust & Geno cide Ce ntre . Among the many takeaways highlighted by Professor Kaufman and drawn from  Lessons from Rwanda: Post-Genocide Law and Policy   were ten simple yet profound lessons:   Lesson #1: Hate speech is dangerous.   To illustrate the role that hate speech played in the Rwandan genocide, Professor Kaufman discussed multiple forms of  propaganda , such as Kangura, Radio Rwanda, and RTLM “hate radio.”   He concludes that we must have limits, including with respect to social media, and further asserts that social media must do a better jo...
Post a Comment
Read more