Journal of Historical Research, Law and Policy 3115-7505 3 Serial Number 12 2025 12 01 Cyberterrorist Crimes and the Development of Counter-Terrorism Legislation: A Comparative Study of Iraqi and Iranian Law Cyberterrorist Crimes and the Development of Counter-Terrorism Legislation: A Comparative Study of Iraqi and Iranian Law 1 21 EN Journal Article 2025 06 12 <p>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.</p> https://jhrlp.com/index.php/jhrlp/article/download/467/444