<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.3 20210610//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1-3.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.3" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xml:lang="ru"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">mgimolaw</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="ru">Московский журнал международного права</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>Moscow Journal of International Law</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">0869-0049</issn><issn pub-type="epub">2619-0893</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Moscow State Institute of International Relations</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.24833/0869-0049-2022-2-66-84</article-id><article-id custom-type="elpub" pub-id-type="custom">mgimolaw-2689</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>ПРАВО МЕЖДУНАРОДНОЙ БЕЗОПАСНОСТИ</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>INTERNATIONAL SECURITY LAW</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Проблемы биобезопасности в современном международном праве</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>Problems of Biosafety in Current International Law</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5771-0888</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name name-style="eastern" xml:lang="ru"><surname>Данельян</surname><given-names>А. А.</given-names></name><name name-style="western" xml:lang="en"><surname>Danalya</surname><given-names>A. A.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>Андрей Андреевич Данельян, доктор юридических наук, профессор, заведующий кафедрой международного права</p><p>Остоженка ул., д. 53/2-1, Москва, 119021</p></bio><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Andrey A. Danelyan, Doctor of Juridical  Sciences, Professor, Head of the Department of International Law</p><p>53/2-1, ul. Ostozhenka, Moscow, 119021</p></bio><email xlink:type="simple">danel1@mail.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8376-7212</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name name-style="eastern" xml:lang="ru"><surname>Гуляева</surname><given-names>Е. Е.</given-names></name><name name-style="western" xml:lang="en"><surname>Gulyaeva</surname><given-names>E. E.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>Елена Евгеньевна Гуляева, кандидат юридических наук, доцент кафедры международного права</p><p>Остоженка ул., д. 53/2-1, Москва, 119021</p></bio><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Elena E. Gulyaeva, Cand. Sci. (Law), Associate Professor at the Department of International Law</p><p>53/2-1, ul. Ostozhenka, Moscow, 119021</p></bio><email xlink:type="simple">gulya-eva@yandex.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff-1"><aff xml:lang="ru"><institution>Дипломатическая академия МИД России</institution><country>Россия</country></aff><aff xml:lang="en"><institution>Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Aﬀairs of Russia</institution><country>Russian Federation</country></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date pub-type="collection"><year>2022</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>06</day><month>07</month><year>2022</year></pub-date><volume>0</volume><issue>2</issue><fpage>66</fpage><lpage>84</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>Copyright &amp;#x00A9; Данельян А.А., Гуляева Е.Е., 2022</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2022</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Данельян А.А., Гуляева Е.Е.</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Danalya A.A., Gulyaeva E.E.</copyright-holder><license xml:lang="ru" license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.</license-p></license><license xml:lang="en" license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.</license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://www.mjil.ru/jour/article/view/2689">https://www.mjil.ru/jour/article/view/2689</self-uri><abstract><sec><title>ВВЕДЕНИЕ</title><p>ВВЕДЕНИЕ. Представленная статья посвящена актуальной теме современного международного права – биобезопасности. Авторы пытаются разобраться в содержании биобезопасности, дать ее правовое определение, рассмотреть проблемы биобезопасности в аспекте ответственности государств за применение биологического оружия. В статье анализируются новые правовые тенденции в обеспечении международной биобезопасности. Авторы статьи, сосредоточив свое внимание на правовых проблемах, рассматривают вопросы применимости к биосфере фундаментальных принципов действующего международного права (принцип неприменения силы, право государств на самооборону в случае биологической атаки, принцип мирного разрешения международных споров, принцип невмешательства во внутренние дела государств и др.). В статье дается обзор таких новых видов суверенитета, как биосуверенитет, киберсуверенитет, кибербиосуверенитет и геномный суверенитет государств; анализируется правовая концепция международных биопреступлений (геномоцид); дается правовая характеристика понятий "биотерроризм", "биоагрессия", "биополитика" и "биоэкономика". Авторы исходят из необходимости широкого толкования понятия «биобезопасность».</p></sec><sec><title>МАТЕРИАЛЫ И МЕТОДЫ</title><p>МАТЕРИАЛЫ И МЕТОДЫ. Эмпирическую базу исследования составили международные договоры, резолюции Генеральной Ассамблеи ООН, материалы Международного уголовного суда, Комиссии международного права. Теоретической основой статьи являются труды отечественных и зарубежных ученых в области международного гуманитарного права. В статье используются общенаучные и специальные методы познания (анализа и синтеза, системный, формально-правовой, сравнительно-правовой, историко-правовой и диалектический).</p></sec><sec><title>РЕЗУЛЬТАТЫ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ</title><p>РЕЗУЛЬТАТЫ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ. Результаты проведенного исследования позволили прийти к выводу, что несмотря на существующий в международном праве запрет биологического и токсического оружия, остается нерешенным вопрос о создании международного механизма контроля за запретом его разработки, производства и накопления, о полномочном международном органе по расследованию актов биотерроризма, а также о применимой к таким случаям норме международного права. На международном уровне и национальном уровне некоторых государств не решена проблема запрета отдельных видов биомедицинских исследований, а также безопасности геномных исследований и конфиденциальности генетических данных. Поскольку биобезопасность связана с экологической, продовольственной и другими видами безопасности и затрагивает вопросы смежных отраслей, она нуждается в комплексном рассмотрении и широком толковании.</p></sec><sec><title>ОБСУЖДЕНИЕ И ВЫВОДЫ</title><p>ОБСУЖДЕНИЕ И ВЫВОДЫ. В статье предлагаются возможные международно-правовые меры по обеспечению биобезопасности. Авторы приходят к выводу, что в ближайшее время в мире наряду с химическим, биологическим, бактериологическим и ядерным оружием может появиться новый вид оружия массового поражения – генетическое оружие. Технологические достижения в этой сфере повлекут за собой необходимость разработки новых норм международного права. Авторы полагают необходимым расширить универсальную юрисдикцию Международного уголовного суда в случае применения биологического и генетического оружия, а также принять Протокол к Конвенции о биологическом и токсинном оружии (КБТО), устанавливающий действенный международный контрольный механизм проверки запретов на разработку, производство и накопление биологического оружия и обращения опасных веществ по всему миру.</p></sec></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="en"><sec><title>INTRODUCTION</title><p>INTRODUCTION. The presented article is devoted to an extremely curious and, without exaggeration, urgent topic. The authors seek to understand the content and legal concept of biosafety in International Law. The researchers seek to list the biosafety issues in order to deﬁne concrete aspects related to responsibility of the States for using biological weapons. The authors analyze new legal trends on ensuring the international biosafety. The article is focused on legal issues by raising many questions about what should be considered a just war in the view of international humanitarian law, the issues of fundamental principles in current international law (the principle use of force, the right of States to self-defense in case of a bioattack, the principle of the peaceful settlement of international disputes, the principle of non-interference in the internal aﬀairs of States, arms control, and responsibility). The writers give an overview of new types of sovereignty such as biosovereignty, cyber sovereignty, cyberbiosovereignty, and genomic sovereignty of States, the legal concept of international biocrimes (genomocide), the legal classiﬁcation of bioterrorism, bioaggression, biopolitics, and bioeconomics. The authors consider the importance of facilitating the broad interpretation of the concept of biosafety.</p></sec><sec><title>MATERIALS AND METHODS</title><p>MATERIALS AND METHODS. The research uses general scientiﬁc and special cognitive techniques wherein legal analysis and synthesis, systemic, formal-legal, comparative-legal, historical-legal and dialectical methods are applied.</p></sec><sec><title>RESEARCH RESULTS</title><p>RESEARCH RESULTS. The authors found out that despite the prohibition of biological weapon there are still other urgent issues such as an international control mechanism for monitoring the non-proliferation of biological weapons has not been established yet. The Protocol to the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC) has not been adopted yet. The study concludes with an idea that the problem of banning certain types of biomedical research has not been solved in some States and at the international level. The authors note such important problems as the lack of an international control mechanism for monitoring the prohibition of the development, production and stockpiling of bacteriological (biological) and toxin weapons, as well as the threat to the safety of genomic research and conﬁdentiality of genetic data. In this paper, we interpret the concept of biosafety rather broadly, considering the issues typical of allied industries. Biosecurity and biosafety are directly related to ensuring environmental security, marine security, food security and outer space security. The researchers paid attention to the issue of legal regulation of ensuring environmental, biological, and food safety. Due to this fact, it is hard to do so with regard to the causal link between the acts (bioterrorism) of state agencies, the violation of the principles of international law, standards of human rights and the consequences that occurred. It is not clear from the text of the BTWC Convention which international organ/body can investigate such acts in international aﬀairs and which norm of international law directly should be applied.</p><p>DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. Following a review of the content, the authors raise possible problems, strategies, suggestions and guidelines for ensuring biosafety in international law. The authors conclude that near future new categories of weapons of mass destruction appear in the world, moreover, genetic weapons should be classiﬁed as weapons of mass destruction, along with chemical, biological, bacteriological, and nuclear weapons. Technological developments will trigger the issues of fundamental principles in current international law. The authors came to the conclusion about extension of the universal jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court in case biological and genetic weapons are used. The authors encourage the complement to the international legal regulation the necessity to adopt a Protocol to the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC), establishing an international control mechanism for verifying prohibitions on the development, production, and stockpiling of biological weapons is obvious. The Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction adopted in 1993, which contains a mechanism for verifying compliance with the prohibitions of the Convention, can be considered a precedent for the eﬀective regulation of the circulation of hazardous substances all over the world.</p></sec></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>биобезопасность</kwd><kwd>кибербиобезопасность</kwd><kwd>молекулярное оружие</kwd><kwd>геномный суверенитет</kwd><kwd>биобанкинг</kwd><kwd>биопреступления</kwd><kwd>геномоцид</kwd><kwd>биотерроризм</kwd><kwd>ответственность государства</kwd><kwd>права человека</kwd><kwd>судебная биотехнология</kwd><kwd>международное уголовное право</kwd><kwd>правовая концепция</kwd><kwd>Конвенция о биологическом и токсинном оружии 1971 г.</kwd><kwd>Международный уголовный суд</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>biosafety</kwd><kwd>cyberbiosecurity</kwd><kwd>molecular weapon</kwd><kwd>genomic sovereignty</kwd><kwd>biobanking</kwd><kwd>biocrimes</kwd><kwd>genomocide</kwd><kwd>bioterrorism</kwd><kwd>State’s responsibility</kwd><kwd>human rights</kwd><kwd>forensic biotechnology</kwd><kwd>international criminal law</kwd><kwd>legal concept</kwd><kwd>Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention of 1971</kwd><kwd>International Criminal Court</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="cit1"><label>1</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Anisimov I., Gulyaeva E. Legal framework of marine genetic resources: ﬁlling the gaps of the United Nation Convention on the law of the seas. – Revista Opinião Jurídica. 2022. Vol. 20. No. 34. P. 164-179.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Anisimov I., Gulyaeva E. Legal framework of marine genetic resources: ﬁlling the gaps of the United Nation Convention on the law of the seas. – Revista Opinião Jurídica. 2022. Vol. 20. No. 34. P. 164-179.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit2"><label>2</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Campbell М. [et al.]. Marine Biosecurity Crisis Decision-Making: Two Tools to Aid “Go”/“No Go” Decision-Making. – Frontiers in Marine Science. 2018. Vol. 5. P.1-14. DOI :10.3389/FMARS.2018.00331</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Campbell М. [et al.]. Marine Biosecurity Crisis Decision-Making: Two Tools to Aid “Go”/“No Go” Decision-Making. – Frontiers in Marine Science. 2018. Vol. 5. P.1-14. DOI :10.3389/FMARS.2018.00331</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit3"><label>3</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Denisenko V., Trikoz E. Biopolitics and legal issues of emergency situations in the context of coronavirus pandemic. – E3S Web of Conferences. 2020. Vol. 175. P. 1-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202017514013</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Denisenko V., Trikoz E. Biopolitics and legal issues of emergency situations in the context of coronavirus pandemic. – E3S Web of Conferences. 2020. Vol. 175. P. 1-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202017514013</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit4"><label>4</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Fidler D. Bioterrorism, Public Health, and International Law. – Chicago Journal of International Law. 2002. Vol. 3. No.1. P. 7-36.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Fidler D. Bioterrorism, Public Health, and International Law. – Chicago Journal of International Law. 2002. Vol. 3. No.1. P. 7-36.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit5"><label>5</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Gronvall G.K. Preparing for Bioterrorism: The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation's Leadership in Biosecurity. Baltimore: Center for Biosecurity of UPMC. 2012. 296 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Gronvall G.K. Preparing for Bioterrorism: The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation's Leadership in Biosecurity. Baltimore: Center for Biosecurity of UPMC. 2012. 296 p.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit6"><label>6</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Janis M. An Introduction to International Law. 2nd ed. Boston: Little Brown &amp; Co Law &amp; Business. 1993. 928 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Janis M. An Introduction to International Law. 2nd ed. Boston: Little Brown &amp; Co Law &amp; Business. 1993. 928 p.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit7"><label>7</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Kalinichenko P. A., Nekoteneva M. V. Аenomnyi suverenitet razvivayushchikhsya stran: prioritety pravovogo regulirovaniya [Genomic Sovereignty of Developing Countries: priorities of legal regulation]. – Geneticheskie tekhnologii i pravo v period stanovleniya bioekonomiki. Otv. red. A. A. Mokhov, O. V. Sushkova [Genetic technologies and law in the formation of the bioeconomy. Ed. by A. A. Mokhov and O. V. Sushkova]. Moscow: Prospekt Publ.2020. P. 497-504. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Kalinichenko P. A., Nekoteneva M. V. Аenomnyi suverenitet razvivayushchikhsya stran: prioritety pravovogo regulirovaniya [Genomic Sovereignty of Developing Countries: priorities of legal regulation]. – Geneticheskie tekhnologii i pravo v period stanovleniya bioekonomiki. Otv. red. A. A. Mokhov, O. V. Sushkova [Genetic technologies and law in the formation of the bioeconomy. Ed. by A. A. Mokhov and O. V. Sushkova]. Moscow: Prospekt Publ.2020. P. 497-504. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit8"><label>8</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Kelsen H. The Draft Declaration on Rights and Duties of States. – American Journal of International Law. 1950.Vol. 44. Issue 2. P. 259-276. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2193756</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Kelsen H. The Draft Declaration on Rights and Duties of States. – American Journal of International Law. 1950.Vol. 44. Issue 2. P. 259-276. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2193756</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit9"><label>9</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Kym A., Lee A.J. Why Are US and EU Policies Toward GMOs So Diﬀerent?. – AgBioForum. 2003. Vol.6. Issue 3. P. 95-100.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Kym A., Lee A.J. Why Are US and EU Policies Toward GMOs So Diﬀerent?. – AgBioForum. 2003. Vol.6. Issue 3. P. 95-100.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit10"><label>10</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Lauren C. [et al.]. Cyberbiosecurity: A Call for Cooperation in a New Threat Landscape. – Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology. 2019. Vol. 7. P. 1-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2019.00099</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Lauren C. [et al.]. Cyberbiosecurity: A Call for Cooperation in a New Threat Landscape. – Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology. 2019. Vol. 7. P. 1-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2019.00099</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit11"><label>11</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Merriam Е. The International Legal Regime Aﬀecting Bioterrorism Prevention. – National Security Law Journal. 2014. Vol. 3. Issue 3. P. 1-46.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Merriam Е. The International Legal Regime Aﬀecting Bioterrorism Prevention. – National Security Law Journal. 2014. Vol. 3. Issue 3. P. 1-46.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit12"><label>12</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Montgomery J. Modiﬁcation of the human genome: Human rights challenges raised by scientiﬁc and technical developments. 2018. URL: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10057969/6/Oviedo%20Convention%20Anniversary%20Paper%20%20Final%208%20December.pdf (accessed 21.01.2022).</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Montgomery J. Modiﬁcation of the human genome: Human rights challenges raised by scientiﬁc and technical developments. 2018. URL: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10057969/6/Oviedo%20Convention%20Anniversary%20Paper%20%20Final%208%20December.pdf (accessed 21.01.2022).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit13"><label>13</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Murch R. [et al.]. Cyberbiosecurity: An Emerging New Discipline to Help Safeguard the Bioeconomy. – Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology. 2018. Vol. 6. P.1-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2018.00039</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Murch R. [et al.]. Cyberbiosecurity: An Emerging New Discipline to Help Safeguard the Bioeconomy. – Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology. 2018. Vol. 6. P.1-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2018.00039</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit14"><label>14</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Rae G. Critiquing Sovereign Violence: Law, Biopolitics, Bio-Juridicalism. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. 2019. 232 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Rae G. Critiquing Sovereign Violence: Law, Biopolitics, Bio-Juridicalism. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. 2019. 232 p.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit15"><label>15</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Rogers A., De Bousingen D.D. 1995. Bioethics in Europe. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Press. 366 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Rogers A., De Bousingen D.D. 1995. Bioethics in Europe. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Press. 366 p.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit16"><label>16</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Sontheimer E.J., Barrangou R. The Bacterial Origins of the CRISPR Genome-Editing Revolution. – Human Gene Therapy. 2015. Vol. 26. Issue 7. P. 413–424. Doi: 10.1089/hum.2015.091</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Sontheimer E.J., Barrangou R. The Bacterial Origins of the CRISPR Genome-Editing Revolution. – Human Gene Therapy. 2015. Vol. 26. Issue 7. P. 413–424. Doi: 10.1089/hum.2015.091</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit17"><label>17</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Taras'yants E. V. Mezhdunarodnaya zashchita i pooshchrenie prav cheloveka v oblasti biomeditsinskikh issledovanii [International Protection and Promotion of Human Rights in Biomedical Research]. Moscow. 2011. 224 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Taras'yants E. V. Mezhdunarodnaya zashchita i pooshchrenie prav cheloveka v oblasti biomeditsinskikh issledovanii [International Protection and Promotion of Human Rights in Biomedical Research]. Moscow. 2011. 224 p.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit18"><label>18</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Trikoz E., Gulyaeva E., Belyaev K. Russian experience of using digital technologies in law and legal risks of AI. – E3S Web of Conferences. 2020. Vol. 224. P.1-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202022403005</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Trikoz E., Gulyaeva E., Belyaev K. Russian experience of using digital technologies in law and legal risks of AI. – E3S Web of Conferences. 2020. Vol. 224. P.1-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202022403005</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit19"><label>19</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Trikoz Е., Gulyaeva Е. Ecological cases of the ECHR and the environmental risk of GMO. – E3S Web of Conferences. 2021. Vol. 244. P.1-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202124412024</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Trikoz Е., Gulyaeva Е. Ecological cases of the ECHR and the environmental risk of GMO. – E3S Web of Conferences. 2021. Vol. 244. P.1-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202124412024</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref></ref-list><fn-group><fn fn-type="conflict"><p>The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.</p></fn></fn-group></back></article>
