Comparative Legal Analysis of IT Legislation of Russia and Sweden

INTRODUCTION. This article provides a compre­hensive analysis of the regulatory frameworks govern­ing the information technology (IT) sector in both Russia and Sweden and encompasses a comparative assessment of key legal instruments, concepts, and regulatory approaches, including the responsibility for cybercrimes, licensing procedures, standardization practices, and the safety of critical informational in­frastructure. Additionally, this article examines the roles and functions of major governing authorities in both countries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. The article is based on relevant legal acts of Russia and Sweden. While there are certain specific laws focused entirely on the informational technologies, some provisions can be found in other types of legal documents (for example criminal codes or governmental regulations). Employ­ing a comparative approach, the study delineates the scope and authority of state institutions involved in the IT sphere.

RESEARCH RESULTS. Both Russian and Sweden exhibit similarities when it comes to definition of es­sential concepts such as critical infrastructure, reflect shared concerns regarding for example security issues. Main laws in the area of information technology con­tain a spectrum of key terms, including but not limited to information and communication network / elec­tronic communication network, information system operator, and information protection / network and information system security. Although the list of key definitions may appear quite similar, the Swedish leg­islation tends to offer broader definitions with the in­tention of encompassing larger domains within IT technologies, while the Russian legislators focus on more specific terms. However, while Sweden aligns closely with European Union (EU) regulatory frame­work, Russia adopts a more expansive approach, ad­dressing emerging technological challenges such as AI. In conclusion, achieving effective IT regulation neces­sitates finding a balance between international con­sistency and national adaptability to ensure strong cybersecurity, foster innovation, and maintain regula­tory flexibility in a dynamic digital environment.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. Sweden’s re­liance on implementing EU regulations has its benefits such as harmonisation, interoperability, adopting the internationally recognised practices, easier market ac­cess, etc. However, this approach may limit the coun­try's ability to meet its specific needs and may mean additional administrative burdens associated with compliance with EU directives. Moreover, changes in EU regulations could lead to a necessity to update do­mestic laws, potentially causing regulatory vacuum or legal collisions, especially in such sphere as the IT sec­tor. Nowadays, when for example the AI and its risks are on the daily agenda one can not look away and wait for the international community to agree on the applicable regulation.

1. Appelgren J., Zouave E. Regelverk och krav inom området industriella informations- och styrsystem. Stockholm: FOI. 2021. (In Swedish)

2. Efremova М.А. Criminal Liability for Unlawful Impact on the Critical Information Infrastructure of the Rus­sian Federation. – Bulletin of the Kazan Law Institute of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia. 2022. № 4 (50). P. 86–92.

3. Ekfeldt J. Om informationstekniskt bevis. Stockholm: Stockholms universitet. 2016. (In Swedish)

4. Franke U. Cybersäkerhet för en uppkopplad ekonomi. Örebro universitet: Entreprenörskapsforum. 2020. (in Swedish)

5. International Information Security: Russia’s Approaches. Ed. by A.V. Krutskikh, E.S. Zinovieva. Moscow: MGIMO-Universitet Publ. 2021.

6. Jonason P. The Use of the Internet, Social Media and Search Engines by Public Authorities in the Context of Administrative Investigations. – Scandinavian studies in law. 2018. № 65. P. 271–284.

7. Karzlen H., Granlund H., Wedlin M. Operationer i cyber­domänen. En inventering av svensk forskning. Stockholm: FOI. 2018. (In Swedish)

8. Magnusson Sjöberg C. Rättsinformatik: juridiken i det digitala informationssamhället. Fjärde upplagan. Lund: Studentlitteratur. 2021. (in Swedish)

9. Malmgren S. Legal tech för dataskydd: Kan teknik lösa de problem som tekniken skapat? – Dataskyddet 50 år – historia, aktuella problem och framtid. Ed. by D. Westman. Magnusson C. Sjöberg, Ö. Sören, D. Törngren, M. Brinnen. Stockholm: Stockholm University. 2023. P. 561–572. (in Swedish)

10. Maunsbach U., Lindskoug P. Jurisdiction and Internet in Relation to Commercial Law Disputes in a European Context. – Scandinavian studies in law. 2010. Vol. 56. Stockholm: Stockholm Institute for Scandinavian Law. P. 303–328.

11. Romashkina N.P., Markov A.S., Stefanovich D.V. Mezh­dunarodnaja bezopasnost', strategicheskaja stabil'nost' i informacionnye tehnologii [International Security, Stra­tegic Stability and Information Technologies]. Moscow: IMEMO, 2020. (In Russ.)

12. Stenérus Dover A.-S., Bengtsson J., Olsson M. IT-inci­denter på statliga myndigheter. – Orsaker till utebliven rapportering. Stockholm: FOI. 2020. (In Swedish)

13. Sukhomlin V.A. The International IT Standardization System, Its Role in the Development of the Information Industry and Its Operating Principles. – Sovremennye informacionnye tehnologii i ITobrazovanie [Modern Infor­mation Technologies and IT-Education]. 2022. Vol. 18 (2). P. 412– 440. (In Russ.)

14. Sundberg C., Tressfeldt J. Contractual Liability when “Things Do Not Go As Planned”: A Practical Perspec­tive. – Nordic Yearbook of Law and Informatics. 2020– 2021. Stockholm. Law Faculty, Stockholm University. 2022. P. 207–221.

15. Trenta C. The Role of Taxation in the Context of the EU Collaborative Cybersecurity Framework. – Law and Sustainable Development: Swedish Perspectives. Ed. by E. Kristoffersson and M. Qandeel. Uppsala: Iustus förlag. 2021. P. 97–135.

16. Vylegzhanin, A.N., Shtodina, D.D. Mezhdunarodno-pravovaja harakteristika regulirovanija onlajn-torgovli v SShA i ES [International legal characterization of e-commerce regulation in the US and the EU]. – Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Tomsk State University Journal]. 2022. Vol. 483. P. 227–239. (In Russ.).

17. Wahlgren P. The Quest for Scientific Methods: Sociology of Law, Jurimetrics and Legal Informatics. – Combining the Legal and the Social in Sociology of Law: An Homage to Reza Banakar. Ed. by H. Hydén , R. Cotterrell , D. Nelken & U. Schultz. Oxford: Hart Publishing. 2023. P. 227–238.

18. Wendleby, M. Lagkommentar till NIS-lagen. Stockholm: JP Juridiskt bibliotek. 2022. (In Swedish)

19. Wennerström E.O. Informations- och cybersäkerhet i Sver­ige. Strategi och åtgärder för säker information i staten. Betänkande av NISU 2014. Stockholm: Norstedts Juridik. 2015.

20. Westman D. Sociala medier – yttrandefrihet och Ans­var.– Ord och rätt: Festskrift till Hans-Gunnar Axberger. Ed. by A. Skarhed, J. Hirschfeldt, M. Ruotsi, D. Westman, S.Carlsson, Visby: eddy.se. 2020. P. 675–704. (In Swedish)