{"id":969,"date":"2022-09-21T15:44:35","date_gmt":"2022-09-21T14:44:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/?post_type=publication&p=969"},"modified":"2022-09-22T11:06:20","modified_gmt":"2022-09-22T10:06:20","slug":"what-is-a-cybercrime","status":"publish","type":"publication","link":"https:\/\/www.mediadefence.org\/ereader\/publications\/modules-on-litigating-freedom-of-expression-and-digital-rights-in-south-and-southeast-asia\/module-7-cybercrimes\/what-is-a-cybercrime\/","title":{"rendered":"What is a Cybercrime?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Definition<\/em><\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

There is no precise, universal definition of the term \u2018cybercrime\u2019.  In general terms, it refers to a crime that is committed using a computer network or the internet.[footnote]Article 19, \u2018Freedom of Expression and ICTs: overview of international standards\u2019 at p. 25 (2018) (accessible at: https:\/\/www.article19.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/FoE-and-ICTs.pdf<\/a>).[\/footnote] This can cover a wide range of activities, including terrorist activities and espionage conducted with the help of the internet, illegal hacking into computer systems, content-related offences, theft and manipulation of data, and cyberstalking.[footnote]Id.<\/em>[\/footnote]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cybercrimes and cybersecurity are two issues that cannot be separated in an interconnected digital environment.  Cybersecurity, or the protection of digital devices, systems and networks against cybercrimes, refers to the collection of \u201ctools, policies, security concepts, security safeguards, guidelines, risk management approaches, actions, training, best practices, assurance and technologies that can be used to protect the cyber environment and organization and user\u2019s assets\u201d, such as computing devices, applications and telecommunication systems.[footnote]ITU Definition of Cybersecurity, (accessible at: https:\/\/www.itu.int\/en\/ITU-T\/studygroups\/2013-2016\/17\/Pages\/cybersecurity.aspx).[\/footnote]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cybercrimes in International Law<\/em><\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The UN General Assembly Resolution on the Creation of a global culture of cyber security<\/a> states:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cSecurity should be implemented in a manner consistent with the values recognised by democratic societies, including the freedom to exchange thoughts and ideas, the free flow of information, the confidentiality of information and communication, the appropriate protection of personal information, openness and transparency.\u201d[footnote]UN General Assembly, Fifty-seventh session, \u2018Resolution on the Creation of a global culture of cyber security, at p 3 (accessible at: https:\/\/digitallibrary.un.org\/record\/482184?ln=en<\/a>).[\/footnote]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The Convention on Cybercrime of the Council of Europe (CETS No.185<\/a>), known as the Budapest Convention, is the only binding international instrument on cybercrime.[footnote]Council of Europe, \u2018Budapest Convention and Related Standards\u2019, (accessible at: https:\/\/www.coe.int\/en\/web\/cybercrime\/the-budapest-convention<\/a>).[\/footnote] This Convention is open for adoption by states outside of Europe, and to date, the Philippines and Sri Lanka are the only two states in South and Southeast Asia that are party to it.[footnote]Council of Europe, \u2018Parties\/Observers to the Budapest Convention and Observer Organisations to the T-CY\u2019 (https:\/\/www.coe.int\/en\/web\/cybercrime\/parties-observers?wpisrc=nl_cybersecurity202<\/a>).[\/footnote] The Budapest Convention has also been used as a \u2018model law\u2019 for legislators in certain jurisdictions.  For example, Sri Lanka modelled its 2007 national legislation, the Computer Crime Act, on the Budapest Convention prior to being invited in 2015 to join the Convention.[footnote]Council of Europe, Cybercrime Convention Committee (T-CY), \u2018The Budapest Convention on Cybercrime: benefits and impact in practice\u2019 (2020) at section 4.2.2, p. 30 (accessible at: https:\/\/rm.coe.int\/t-cy-2020-16-bc-benefits-rep-provisional\/16809ef6ac<\/a>).[\/footnote]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although it has been cited as a \u2018benchmark\u2019 by certain participants in current negotiations for a UN convention on cybercrime, the Budapest Convention has been criticised for providing insufficient procedural protections for the rights to freedom of expression and privacy, and for containing superfluous and overbroad content and copyright offences.[footnote]See Article 19\u2019s briefing, \u2018The Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime and the First and Second Additional Protocol\u2019 (2022) (accessible at: https:\/\/www.article19.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/Budapest-Convention-analysis-May-2022.pdf<\/a>).[\/footnote]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cybercrimes in Domestic Law<\/em><\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Cybercrimes legislation has proliferated across South and Southeast Asia in recent years despite only two states in the region being party to the Budapest Convention.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To ensure that cybercrimes laws do not unnecessarily infringe on the fundamental rights to freedom of expression, privacy and access to information, legislation should meet the following criteria:<\/p>\n\n\n\n