As the latest negotiating session on the proposed UN Cybercrime Treaty wrapped up in New York earlier this month, one thing was clear: with time running out to finalize the text, little progress and consensus was reached on crucial points, such as the treaty’s overall scope of application and the reach of its criminal procedure mandates and international cooperation measures.
Instead, a plethora of proposed word changes was added, further complicated by additional amendments published in informal reports well after the two-week session ended September 2. We saw many of the same highly dangerous criminal offenses and surveillance measures that had not made it into the zero draft reintroduced back into the text. The original zero draft, as well as the last set of amendments discussed in behind-closed doors negotiations, turned into a sea of redlines.
It became apparent that many nations, including Russia, Eritrea, Burundi, Sierra Leone, Zimbabwe, Ghana, Korea, and others, were vying to expand the proposed treaty’s surveillance scope to cover practically any offense imaginable where a computer was involved, both at home and abroad.
“We believe a future convention ought to cover the largest possible range of offenses that could be committed using information and communication technologies (ICTs),” said Burkina Faso’s delegate.
According to the domestic surveillance chapter, evidence gathering could be marshaled against any act deemed criminal as defined by that nation’s own laws. When shifting to international cooperation, the initial drafts and several This article has been indexed from Deeplinks
Read the original article: