Page 34 - Forensic News Journal Oct Nov 2017

Science And Technology: Their Relationship with Law

a territorial phenomenon. tory of a single sovereign It turns out that countries

Cybercrime makes these state; instead, “pieces” of think quite differently on
principles problematic the cybercrime occur in this issue. The cybercrime
in varying ways and in territory claimed by sev- statutes of numerous

varying degrees. Unlike eral different sovereigns. countries show varying F
real-world crime, it is not and diverging jurisdiction O

physically grounded; it Cybercrime is a primary clauses. Since internet al- R
increasingly tends not to example of cross-border lows transactions between E
occur in a single sovereign crime, and so, it raises the persons of various juris- N

territory. issue of jurisdiction. This dictions, an international S
The perpetrator of a cy- is a tricky issue. Acts on agreement (to be crystal- I

bercrime may physically the Internet that are le- lized into a convention, C
gal in the state later) is required for any
where they are regulation. However, in M

initiated may be arriving at a uniform law, E
illegal in other varying standards adopted T

states, even by jurisdictions across H
though the act is the world and the point of O
not particularly balance adopted by them D

targeted at that have to be kept in mind. O
state. Jurisdic- L
Photo Courtesy of reilly.nd.edu
tion conflicts Jurisdiction is a highly O
be in Country A, while his abound, both negative debatable issue as to the G
victim is in Country B, or (no state claims jurisdic- maintainability of any suit Y

his victims are in Coun- tion) and positive (several that has been filed. Today
tries B, C, and D and so states claim jurisdiction with the growing arms

on. The perpetrator may at the same time). Above of cyberspace the territo-
further complicate mat- all, it is unclear just what rial boundaries seems to
ters by routing his attack constitutes jurisdiction: is vanish thus the concept

on the victim in Country it the place of the act, the of territorial jurisdiction
B through computers in country of residence of as envisaged under S.16

Countries F and G. The the perpetrator, the loca- of C.P.C. and S.2.of the
result of these and other tion of the effect, or the I.P.C. will have to give
cybercrime scenarios is nationality of the owner of way to alternative method

that the cybercrime is not the computer that is under of dispute resolution.
committed “in” the terri- attack? Or these at once?

34