Three nations outline cyber law views ahead of UN talks

In the lead-up to the concluding session of the UN Open-Ended Working Group (OEWG) on ICTs, Thailand, New Zealand, and South Korea have released their respective national positions on the application of international law in cyberspace, contributing to the growing corpus of state practice on the issue.

Thailand’s position (July 2025) emphasises that existing international law, including the Charter of the UN, applies to the conduct of States in cyberspace. Speaking of international humanitarian law (IHL), Thailand stresses that the IHL applies to cyber operations conducted in the context of armed conflicts and all forms of warfare, including cyberwarfare. Thailand also affirms that sovereignty applies in full to state activities conducted in cyberspace, and even if the cyber operation does not rise to the level of a prohibited use of force under international law, such an act still amounts to an internationally wrongful act.

New Zealand’s updated statement builds upon its 2020 position by reaffirming that international law applies to cyberspace “in the same way it applies in the physical world.” It provides expanded commentary on the principles of sovereignty and due diligence, explicitly recognising that New Zealand

does not consider that territorial sovereignty prohibits every unauthorised intrusion into a foreign ICT system or prohibits all cyber activity which has effects on the territory of another state. The statement further provides that New Zealand considers that the rule of territorial sovereignty, as applied in the cyber context, does not prohibit states from taking necessary measures, with minimally destructive effects, to defend against the harmful activity

of malicious cyber actors.

South Korea’s position focuses on the applicability of international law to military cyber operations. It affirms the applicability of the UN Charter and IHL, emphasising restraint and the protection of civilians in cyberspace. Commenting on sovereignty, they say their position is close to Thailand’s. South Korea affirms that no State may intervene in the domestic affairs of another and reminds that this principle is explicitly codified in Article 2(7) of the UN Charter and has been affirmed in international jurisprudence. Hence, according to the document, the principle of sovereignty also applies equally in cyberspace. The position paper also highlights that under general international law, lawful countermeasures are permissible in response to internationally wrongful acts, and this principle applies equally in cyberspace. Given the anonymity and transboundary nature of cyberspace, which

often places the injured state at a structural disadvantage, the necessity of countermeasures may be recognised as a means of ensuring adequate protection for the wounded state.

These publications come at a critical juncture as the OEWG seeks to finalise its report on responsible state behaviour in cyberspace. With these latest contributions, the number of publicly released national positions on international law in cyberspace continues to grow, reflecting increasing engagement from states across regions.