04 August 2020



本件は、カタールと湾岸周辺国の国交断絶後(2017年6月)、カタールを本拠とするメディア企業(beIN)が保有するコンテンツ(スポーツ娯楽等)について、サウジアラビアに設立された事業者(beoutQ)がインターネット等を通じて海賊配信を行ったことに端を発します。同海賊事業への関与を否定するサウジアラビアに対し、カタールはサウジ高官等が発した複数のtweetを証拠として提出し(beINに代わる事業者のサウジ市場への登場を予期する等)、サウジ政府による海賊事業への関与(とりわけ2018年ワールドカップを海賊放送した上でのパブリックビューイングのプロモーション)を立証しようとします。対するサウジアラビアは、"unofficial, non-government tweets are not usually recognized by legal adjudicators or attributed to a government without explicit approval"と主張し、当該tweetの価値を否定しようとします(7.47項)。この文脈でパネルは、懸案のtweetは行為帰属ではなく、海賊事業者がサウジアラビアの刑事管轄権に服するか否か(著作権侵害に関する刑事手続及び罰則を制定する義務を定めるTRIPS協定第61条違反申立てとの関連で必要)という観点から検討されると判断します(7.117項)。

"The Panel discusses these tweets, not because they are attributable to the Government of Saudi Arabia, but because they are evidence that beoutQ was promoted by prominent individuals and newspapers within Saudi Arabia, which is relevant to the question of whether beoutQ is operated by individuals or entities subject to the criminal jurisdiction of Saudi Arabia".


"The Panel considers that Saudi Arabia's statement that "unofficial, non-government tweets are not usually recognized by legal adjudicators or attributed to a government without explicit approval" is beside the point, because most of the tweets in question are in fact governmental tweets. Article 11 of the ILC Articles on State Responsibility, entitled "Conduct acknowledged and adopted by a State as its own", provides that "[c]onduct which is not attributable to a State … shall nevertheless be considered an act of that State under international law if and to the extent that the State acknowledges and adopts the conduct in question as its own." By its terms, the principle only applies to conduct that is not otherwise attributable to a state. However, as already noted above, under general international law principles of state responsibility, actions at all levels of government (local, municipal, federal), or by any agency within any level of government, are attributable to the State".


"The Court takes the view that statements of this kind, emanating from high-ranking official political figures. sometimes indeed of the highest rank, are of particular probative value when they acknowledge facts or conduct unfavourable to the State represented by the person who made them. They may then be construed as a form of admission" (ICJ Reports 1986, p. 41, para. 64).