Cyberterrorist Crimes and the Development of Counter-Terrorism Legislation: A Comparative Study of Iraqi and Iranian Law

Authors

Keywords:

Cyberterrorism, Cybercrime, Terrorist Crimes, Cyberspace, Iraqi Law, Iranian Law, Counter, Terrorism Legislation, Cybersecurity

Abstract

The rapid expansion of cyberspace has transformed the nature, methods, and scope of terrorist activity by providing terrorist actors with new tools for communication, propaganda, recruitment, financing, intelligence gathering, intimidation, espionage, and attacks against information systems and critical infrastructure. This study examines the principal types of terrorist crimes committed in cyberspace and analyzes the development of legislation designed to combat them in Iraqi and Iranian law. Using a descriptive, analytical, and comparative legal approach, the study distinguishes cyberterrorism from ordinary cybercrime by emphasizing terrorist purpose, target selection, intended consequences, and the connection between digital conduct and broader terrorist objectives. The analysis identifies major forms of cyberterrorist activity, including online dissemination of extremist content, recruitment and radicalization, terrorist communication and coordination, cyber threats, electronic espionage, terrorist financing through digital channels, unauthorized access to protected systems, data interference, and attacks against critical infrastructure. The study then evaluates the legislative frameworks of Iraq and Iran. The findings indicate that Iraq primarily relies on general anti-terrorism legislation, institutional counter-terrorism powers, and developing cybercrime rules, resulting in a relatively fragmented legal framework, particularly regarding electronic evidence, extraterritorial jurisdiction, and technologically specific offenses. Iran has developed a comparatively more established framework through computer-crime legislation, terrorist-financing regulation, and specialized cybersecurity mechanisms, although clearer integration between cybercrime provisions and terrorism-related offenses remains necessary. The comparative analysis demonstrates that both legal systems require more precise definitions of cyberterrorist conduct, stronger rules governing digital evidence, improved protection of critical infrastructure, enhanced institutional specialization, and more effective international cooperation. The study concludes that an effective legal response should be technology-neutral, proportionate, and sufficiently precise to distinguish cyberterrorism from ordinary cybercrime, hacktivism, espionage, and lawful digital expression.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Conway M. Determining the role of the internet in violent extremism and terrorism: Six suggestions for progressing research. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism. 2017;40(1):77-98. doi: 10.1080/1057610X.2016.1157408.

2. Al-Rawi A. Cyberterrorism in the Middle East: The case of ISIS. Journal of Strategic Security. 2017;10(1):1-17. doi: 10.5038/1944-0472.10.1.1547.

3. Al-Kaabi FA, Al-Kahtani MA. Cyber terrorism: Threats and responses in the Middle East. Journal of Security Studies. 2018;12(3):210-25.

4. Efrati N, Kshetri N. Cybercrime and cyberterrorism in the Middle East: A comprehensive review. Journal of Global Security Studies. 2021;6(2):ogab004.

5. Al-Dabbagh M. Cybersecurity challenges in Iraq: An overview. Journal of Information Security and Cybercrimes Research. 2020;3(1):1-10. doi: 10.26735/iszv5079.

6. Al-Jaberi R. Digital security and cybercrime legislation in Iraq: A critical analysis. Iraqi Journal of Information and Communication Technology. 2022;4(2):35-50.

7. Mahmod AH. Cybersecurity capacity building in post-conflict Iraq: Challenges and opportunities. International Journal of Cyber Policy. 2022;5(3):201-15.

8. Ghafarian M, Shahi A. The legal framework for cybersecurity in Iran: An analysis of current challenges. Iranian Journal of Legal Studies. 2020;6(2):55-70.

9. Akbarzadeh S. Iran and the Global War on Terror: Challenges and Responses. Middle East Policy. 2015;22(1):98-109. doi: 10.1111/mepo.12118.

10. Le M. The new era of hacktivism. 2024 2024/10/23.

11. Lawfare. Artificial intelligence is accelerating Iranian cyber operations. Lawfare. 2024.

12. Vu AV, Hutchings A, Anderson R. Yet another diminishing spark: Low level cyberattacks in the Israel Gaza conflict. [Preprint]. In press 2025.

13. Fidler D. Cybersecurity and international law. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies. 2015;21(2):317-36.

14. Karamifar F, Tabibian S, Rezaei SA. The role of international treaties in combating cyber terrorism: A legal analysis. Legal Studies in the Digital Age. 2024.

15. Benton M, Atkinson RD. Cybersecurity in the Middle East: Bridging the gap between threats and capabilities. Journal of Cyber Policy. 2016;1(2):207-23. doi: 10.1080/23738871.2016.1238953.

16. Kaspersky L. Cyberthreats in the Middle East: Trends and statistics. 2020.

17. Hassan H. The cyber jihad: How terrorists use the internet. Journal of Terrorism Research. 2019;10(2):25-38. doi: 10.15664/jtr.1477.

18. Cruz TJ, Simoes P. Cybersecurity in developing countries: Threats and policy responses. Computers & Security. 2019;87:101581. doi: 10.1016/j.cose.2019.101581.

19. Alalaq AS. The Oxford Insights Government AI Readiness Index: A case study of Iraq. [Preprint]. In press 2025.

20. Sarker PP, Das U, Varshney N, Shi S, Kulkarni A, Farahmandi F, et al. When everyday devices become weapons: A closer look at the pager and walkie talkie attacks. [Preprint]. In press 2025.

Downloads

Publication Timeline

Published
Submitted
Revised
Accepted

How to Cite

Khaleghi , A. ., & Khudhair Khudhair, H. A. (2025). Cyberterrorist Crimes and the Development of Counter-Terrorism Legislation: A Comparative Study of Iraqi and Iranian Law. Journal of Historical Research, Law and Policy, 3(4), 1-21. https://jhrlp.com/index.php/jhrlp/article/view/467

Similar Articles

61-70 of 301

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.