The thesis is dedicated to developing the concept of attribution of the conduct of state and non-state actors to the state. Two approaches are the basis for the concept: the state focused one and the individual-based one in which definition the criterion of the status of the subject of conduct violating the international obligations of states (state and non-state) and the criterion of the way of connection of the subject of conduct with the state (functional and factual) have been applied. According to the state focused approach the illegal conduct can be an attributed to the state for determining its international responsibility, first, at committing of illegal conduct by a government body, including the conduct made with violation of powers or their excess (ultra vires). In this case the link between the state and the subject of some concrete conduct has a functional character; secondly, at committing of illegal conduct by a person or a formation which isn’t the state, however having functional or actual links with the state, in particular, the conduct of persons or formations carrying out elements of governmental power; the conduct at absence or insolvency of the official power; the conduct carried out under the direction or control of the state, etc. The individual-based approach is considered in two planes. First, the conduct of private actors who functionally or actually aren’t connected with the state, can be attributed to the state in the cases directly provided by an international legal norm. Secondly, the state, in connection with the conduct of the private actors functionally or actually not linked with a government, is attributed the conduct of its own governmental bodies for non-compliance with the due diligence standard. Specifics of fixing in the international legal doctrine and practice of the concept of «attribution» through its ratio with the categories «fault» and «imputation» have been brought to light. The definition of attribution as the recognition of an action or a divergence of state or non-state actors as an act of a state is provided for establishment of its international responsibility. Both traditional (the theory of subjective responsibility, the theory of objective responsibility) and compromising concepts (the eclectic approach, the theory of «due diligence»)) concerning understanding of the concept of fault in the international law have been investigated in details. It is proved that the fault as an obligatory element of an international-illegal act of a state is deemed legal only in the case when it is regulated by a concrete primary norm of the international law. It is emphasized that for establishment of responsibility of the state for the conduct of individuals contradicting international obligations of states and the lack of the link that would be significant from the point of view of rules of attribution, it is necessary to use the special approach based on application of the due diligence standard. Practice of application of the principle of due diligence is one of effective tools that allows to realize the whole ensuring interests of the international commonwealth in maintenance of stability and tranquility on the international scene, including observance of the rights and freedoms of separate individuals which suffered from violations from private actors, and – at the same time, – to induce the states to committing of actions which will allow to warn and turn off violation of recognized international values not only by state institutions, but also by individuals and formations. It has been proved that international judicial and quasijudicial authorities expanded limits of responsibility of states while applying international agreements on human rights. The tendency of establishment of the international responsibility of states in connection with conduct of individuals breaking international and recognized values, is promoted, in particular, by development of the concept of positive obligations: after all, the effective implementation of fundamental rights and freedoms of the person depends not only on performance of its own obligations by a state because of its non-interference, but it can also demand the use of a number of positive actions concerning protection even in the sphere of interpersonal relations.
