Note: Effective governance in cyberspace is not only a challenge for our country or exclusively for Islamic countries but for all countries that engage with cyberspace. This underscores the critical need to study cyberspace governance models in other countries. Dr. Tayyebeh Mohammadi Kia, holder of a PhD in International Relations and a faculty member of the Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies, in an exclusive interview with Contemporary Jurisprudence, explores the requirements for cyberspace governance and the experiences of other countries in this regard. Her proficiency in German and English has provided her with valuable insights for studying these experiences. The full text of this exclusive interview is presented below:

Contemporary Jurisprudence: What are the requirements and characteristics of successful cyberspace governance?

Mohammadi Kia: The primary challenge in cyberspace governance stems from the complexity of network oversight. A large number of countries, private entities, international organizations, and non-governmental actors are involved in the cyber structure. Cyberspace governance can be framed under the concept of crisis management and rapid response to threats, closely intertwined with the notion of security. Consequently, the primary task of cyber governance is linked to cybersecurity. Cybersecurity involves close interactions among individuals, governments, and organizations. Similarly, a diverse range of actors participate in what can broadly be termed “cyberattacks.” In such a context, the technical complexity of networks makes it difficult for regulatory bodies, such as parliamentary committees—often with limited capacity—to track these actors, become aware of their existence and activities, or even obtain legal authorization to do so. However, to discuss success in cyberspace governance beyond the fundamental need for security, several key requirements and characteristics must be highlighted:

1. Transparency: Successful cyberspace governance requires that information and decisions be transparent and accessible to all. This approach fosters public trust and enhances the success rate of governance.
2. Public Participation: Participation and periodic public assessments should be considered a criterion for successful governance, and cyberspace provides an ideal platform to facilitate this. Creating opportunities for public participation and involving citizens in decision-making processes can improve governance.
3. Responsibility and Accountability: A responsive government is one of the achievements of modern governance approaches, recognized through public participation and demands. This phenomenon can be pursued more effectively and seriously in cyberspace, where officials’ accountability for their actions and behaviors can be rigorously demanded.
4. Security of Individuals, Institutions, and Organizations, and Protection of Privacy: Ensuring the security of information alongside respect for users’ privacy is a key element of cyberspace governance.
5. Culture, Education, and Appropriate Laws and Regulations: This encompasses both educating citizens and the efforts of policymakers in cyberspace governance. This enhances digital literacy among citizens and, on the other hand, effective laws and policies for managing cyberspace can serve as an efficient solution to prevent violations.
6. Innovation, Technological Development, and Infrastructure Provision: This includes leveraging new technologies and improving the quality of services to streamline governance processes. Additionally, investing in information and communication technology (ICT) infrastructure can contribute to better governance.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: What are the approaches to cyberspace governance in other countries?

Mohammadi Kia: Approaches to cyberspace governance vary across countries, depending on factors such as culture, economy, and technological advancement. However, some fundamental points can be outlined:

• Stringent Data Protection Laws: Countries like Germany adhere to the GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) or strict data protection laws.
• Public Participation: Participation, surveys, and civic consultations can serve as legal mechanisms in the decision-making process.
• Smart Governance: Creating digital platforms for interaction between governments and citizens, utilizing technology to provide governmental services, is a notable practice in some countries. This also includes digital education and awareness programs to enhance digital literacy and awareness of cyberspace risks.
• Private Sector Involvement: Some governments manage cyberspace through industry-based regulation. For instance, in the United States, private industries may set rules and regulations instead of the government.

Based on these criteria, in digital governance, many government services are provided online. Digital governance must prioritize the role of the electronic citizen, enabling individuals to access services, facilities, and businesses. This governance model must be transparent and accountable. For example, in countries like Sweden and Norway, transparent governance, public participation, and independent citizen oversight in virtual governance processes are evident. The GDPR, effective since May 25, 2018, is one of the most advanced and stringent data protection regulations globally. Its key provisions include: protection of privacy, explicit user consent for data collection and processing, the right to be forgotten (allowing users to request the deletion of their data), hefty fines for non-compliance, and educating users about their privacy and data protection rights.

Conversely, countries like China and Russia adopt different priorities in virtual governance. In China, smart governance is based on strict control and surveillance, with restricted access to foreign information and platforms, offering citizens domestic platforms instead. This governance model also incorporates digital identification systems, utilizing facial recognition technologies for monitoring, control, and identification. Each governance model has its strengths and weaknesses and can serve as a model depending on the specific policies and characteristics of each government or sovereignty.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: Given that most countries have non-religious governance, can their cyberspace governance models be adopted for our country?

Mohammadi Kia: The role of religions and religious doctrines in cyberspace governance varies significantly across countries, depending on their cultural, social, and political contexts. In countries with rich religious structures, histories, and cultures, cyberspace governance is more influenced by religious beliefs and Sharia, reflected in policies and regulations concerning privacy, freedom of expression, and content access restrictions. Notably, religion and community-oriented values should be recognized as sources of ethical and social norms for regulating user behavior in cyberspace. However, based on the relationship between government and religion, different forms of virtual governance and religion can be identified.

The influence of religious elements in cyberspace governance is further elaborated as follows:

• Countries with Non-Religious Governance: The laws and regulations of these governments are not directly influenced by religious doctrines, but social and ethical approaches may still have religious roots, observable in cyberspace. Additionally, countries with religious diversity adopt varied approaches to cyberspace governance and policymaking, primarily focusing on respecting privacy and adhering to principles of human rights and fundamental freedoms to foster public cohesion in cyberspace. In such countries, religion can influence laws and policies, for example, through compromises among different religious groups. However, religious diversity can also lead to conflicts in cyberspace, as seen in India, where religious diversity has made cyberspace a battleground for religious and political groups.
• Countries with Religious Governance: These countries operate based on religious laws and regulations, and cyberspace is similarly influenced. This impact is evident in content control, filtering, and activity monitoring, typically aligned with religious values. This influence operates on both political and social levels, resulting in more religious content on virtual platforms compared to non-religious governments, affecting interactions between governments and citizens and vice versa. Examples include:
  • Promotion of Religious Ideology: Religious governments use cyberspace to promote religious beliefs and values.
  • Addressing Religious Doubts: Religious governments strive to respond to religious doubts or criticisms.
  • Creating Religious Platforms: Religious governments support religious platforms.

The approach to virtual governance and religion is further explained under the following fundamental concepts:

• Cyber Sovereignty: This refers to a government’s right to oversee, regulate, and control cyberspace within its borders. For religious governments, where religion is a basis of legitimacy, this right can be utilized in shaping cyberspace governance.
• Normative Frameworks: Given the role of religion in social structures, it can influence the formation of normative frameworks for cyber governance, guiding user and government behavior.
• Techno-Policy: In religious governments, policymaking is often influenced by religious principles, implemented through national networks, local platforms, or algorithmic control.
• Cyber Governance Regimes: Religious governments implement these regimes through a combination of state oversight and religious influence.
• Soft Security: Religion in cyberspace serves as a tool for enhancing soft security, countering external cultural and ideological narratives and threats targeting religious identity.
• Online Public Sphere: This can be a space for interaction between religion and freedom of expression, fostering awareness while potentially becoming a site of conflict over religious values.
• Religious Digital Colonization: The global or regional spread of religious values through advanced cyberspace capabilities enables some governments to promote their religious values via global and regional platforms, identifiable as religious influence or colonization.
• Religious Soft Power: Cyberspace can serve as a tool for expanding the soft power of governments and religious groups.
• Online Religious Diplomacy: Social networks can be used to promote values and engage with international governments, organizations, and communities.
• Fighting Religious Radicalism: Cyberspace governance can counter religious extremism through appropriate education and identification of extremist groups.

In summary, the influence of religions on cyberspace governance is heavily dependent on each country’s culture and history. Additionally, adopting laws and experiences from other countries can be effective in organizing the relationship of religious governments with cyberspace. These laws reflect global efforts to standardize and enhance data protection, serving as a technology-based tool for effective cyberspace governance, regardless of a government’s religious or non-religious nature or a society’s level of religiosity. Finally, irrespective of whether governments are religious or non-religious, many have enacted laws to prevent the spread of immoral or irreligious content in cyberspace.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: What are the challenges faced by other countries in cyberspace governance, and what measures have they taken to address them?

Mohammadi Kia: Cyberspace governance is one of the most complex issues in policy and management, facing numerous challenges, including political, economic, social, and security-related issues:

• Governance Challenges: Cyber sovereignty and national sovereignty face challenges in maintaining control against multinational corporations (e.g., Google, Amazon, Meta), as physical borders are indistinguishable in cyberspace, making the enforcement of national laws difficult. Global internet standards sometimes conflict with local values or national laws. Additionally, the multi-stakeholder nature of cyberspace governance requires interaction among governments, tech companies, civil society, and users, which can sometimes be conflicting.
• Security Challenges: Security issues are among the most critical challenges, encompassing cybercrimes, state-sponsored cyberattacks, cyber warfare between nations, and other cyberattacks.
• Socio-Cultural Challenges: Increased interaction among individuals, groups, and nations can create tensions in various areas, including social and cultural domains.
• Widening Digital Inequality: Unequal access to the internet and technology has widened the digital divide among different social groups and nations.
• Economic Challenges: In the context of globalization and cyberspace expansion, the economy poses a novel and distinct challenge for governments, particularly due to the monopolistic dominance of tech giants and unfair global competition.

To address these challenges, governments have adopted various measures:

• Strengthening Cyber Sovereignty: Developing national information networks to better control data and internet traffic, such as Iran’s National Information Network or China’s Great Firewall to regulate foreign traffic, and enacting national laws to regulate international platforms within their territories.
• International Collaboration: This includes signing international agreements to combat cybercrimes and cyberattacks.
• Budapest Convention: This convention represents an effort to create a global framework to address cybercrimes.

In summary, governments strive to balance civil liberties, national security, and economic interests in cyberspace governance. This need becomes increasingly pressing as cyberspace grows more complex. Governance in cyberspace is a multifaceted issue, encompassing concepts such as national sovereignty, cybersecurity, information control, and soft power. Among these, cyber sovereignty and transnational challenges with the ambiguous boundaries of cyberspace are noteworthy, as governments are unable to fully control the flow of information, and multinational corporations challenge national sovereignty.

Another challenge is security threats in cyberspace. Based on theories of comprehensive cybersecurity and human security, governments face multifaceted threats, including cyberattacks (from both state and non-state actors), transnational cybercrimes (where non-state actors undermine domestic laws through transnational activities), and information warfare (where countries use cyberspace to advance strategic goals through disinformation and propaganda). Disinformation can lead to increased public dissatisfaction, distrust, polarization, and social unrest. According to the theory of public opinion security, disinformation and fake news should be considered serious threats to political legitimacy and social cohesion.

The digital divide and social security represent another political-social threat to cyberspace governance. Based on the theory of social justice, unequal access to technology and the internet constitutes a new form of inequality. Digital deprivation of vulnerable groups exacerbates economic disparities, as advanced technologies are more accessible to economically stronger groups. In this context, governments can address these challenges by strengthening cyber sovereignty, cooperative security through international agreements, and regulatory state measures—such as enforcing strict regulations like requiring platforms to remove harmful content, ensuring algorithm transparency, protecting user data (e.g., GDPR in the EU), cyber deterrence through the establishment of cyber defense units and investment in advanced technologies, information control, and focusing on human security and sustainable development.

In conclusion, governments can succeed in cyberspace governance by combining hard power and soft power, adopting constructive approaches toward multilateral cyber governance, and strengthening digital sovereignty.