Abstract
The advent of digital technology and the convergence of computing and communications have begun to change the way we live. These trends have also created unprecedented opportunities for crime. Criminal activities that were not foreseeable two decades ago have become facts of life today. Digital technologies now provide ordinary citizens, even juveniles, with the capacity to inflict massive harm. It is essential for public prosecutors to equip themselves with the knowledge that will permit an effective response. The continued uptake of digital technology will create new opportunities for criminal exploitation.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/manualpart1_1.pdf (visited 17 August 2007)
Australia: The Prosecution Policy of the Commonwealth http://www.cdpp.gov.au/cdpp/prospol.html. United States: Principles of Federal Prosecution http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/27mcrm.htm. United Kingdom: Code for Crown Prosecutors http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/docs/code2004english.pdf. People’s Republic of China (Hong Kong Special Administrative Region): Statement of Prosecution Policy and Practice http://www.doj.gov.hk/eng/public/pub20021031toc.htm
Because of constitutional safeguards, the United States has particularly exacting constraints on search and seizure. See [24].
Issues regarding the importance of rule of law are discussed in a separate paper and workshop of this Summit. See also below section on human rights.
http://www.bbsdocumentary.com/library/CONTROVERSY/RAIDS/CYBERSNARE/ (visited 6 May 2005).
http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html (visited 8 May 2005)
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/a_ccpr.htm (visited 8 May 2005)
http://www.hri.org/docs/ECHR50.html (visited 17 August 2007)
[See Crimes (Child Sex Tourism) Amendment Act 1994 (Cth) which inserted new offences into the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)].
Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), as introduced by the Cybercrime Act 2001 (Cth) and augmented by subsequent legislation including the Crimes Legislation Amendment (Telecommunications Offences and Other Measures) Act (No. 2) 2004 (Cth), s476.3
When, for example, they are committed by an organized criminal group.
http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/185.htm (visited 28 September 2007)
See Bangkok Declaration 2005, Synergies and Responses: Strategic Alliances in Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice; available at http://www.unodc.org/pdf/crime/congress11/BangkokDeclaration.pdf
References
Bellia, P. L. (2001). Chasing bits across borders. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 35–101.
Brenner, S., & Frederiksen B. (2001). Computer searches and seizures: Some unresolved issues. Michigan Telecommunications and Technology Law Review, 8, 39–114.
Brenner, S., & Schwerha, J. J. (2002). Transnational evidence gathering and local prosecution of cybercrime. John Marshall Journal of Computer and Information Law, 20, 347.
Bullwinkel, J. (2005). International cooperation in combating cyber-crime in Asia: Existing mechanisms and new approaches. In R. Broadhurst, & P. Grabosky (Eds.), Cyber-crime: The challenge in Asia (pp. 269–302). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Coll, S., & Glasser, S. (2005). In London, islamic radicals found a haven. The Washington Post, July 10, A01. Retrieved July 26, 2005, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/09/AR2005070901390_pf.html.
Commonwealth Secretariat (2004). LAWDevelopment: Issues of the Commonwealth Issue 4. http://www.thecommonwealth.org/law.
Denning, D. (2000). Cyberterrorism. Testimony before the special oversight panel on terrorism, committee on armed services, U.S. House of Representatives, May 23, 2000. Retrieved March 12, 2005, from http://www.cs.georgetown.edu/~denning/infosec/cyberterror.html.
Drozdova, E. (2001). Civil liberties and security in cyberspace. In A. Sofaer & S. Goodman (Eds.), The transnational dimension of cyber crime and terrorism (pp. 183–220). Stanford: Hoover Institution Press. http://www.hoover.org/publications/books/cybercrime.html.
Grabosky, P. (2004). The global dimension of cybercrime. Global Crime, 6(1), 146–157.
Grabosky, P., Smith, R., & Dempsey, G. (2001). Electronic theft: Unlawful acquisition in cyberspace. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Johnson, D. (2002). The Japanese way of justice: Prosecuting crime in Japan. New York: Oxford University Press.
Krone, T. (2005). Phishing. High Tech Crime Brief No 9. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. Retrieved July 5, 2005, from http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/htcb/htcb009.html.
McKemmish, R. (1999). What is forensic computing? Trends and issues in crime and criminal justice #118. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/ti118.pdf.
Morris, S. (2004a). The future of netcrime now: Part 1—threats and challenges home office online report 62/04. Retrieved March 12, 2005, from http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs04/rdsolr6204.pdf.
Nasheri, H. (2005). Economic espionage and industrial spying. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Park, E. (2001). Analysis of Internet crime in Korea and countermeasures. Paper presented to the Sixth Annual Conference of the International Association of Prosecutors, Sydney, Australia, September 2–7, 2001. http://www.iap.nl.com/speeches2/internetcrime.html.
Podgor, E. (2002). International computer fraud: A paradigm for limiting national jurisdiction. UC Davis Law Review, 35, 267–317.
Pollitt, M. (2003). “Digital evidence in internet time”. In R. Broadhurst (Ed.), Bridging the GAP: A Global Alliance on Transnational Organised Crime. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Police.
Smith, R. G., Grabosky, P., & Urbas, G. (2004). Cyber criminals on trial. Cambridge: University Press Cambridge.
Soma, J. T., Muther, T. F. Jr., & Brisette, H. (1997). Transnational extradition for computer crimes: Are new treaties and laws needed? Harvard Journal on Legislation, 34, 317–370.
Tan, K. H. (2000). Prosecuting foreign based computer crime: International law and technology collide. Presented at the Symposium on the Rule of Law in the Global Village, Palermo, Italy, December 12–14, 2000. http://www.undcp.org/adhoc/palermo/convmain.html.
Thomas, T. L (2003). Al Qaeda and the Internet: The danger of “cyberplanning”. Parameters, 33(1), 112–123. Retrieved March 12, 2005, from http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usawc/Parameters/03spring/thomas.htm.
UNAFEI (1995). Criminal justice profiles of Asia. Tokyo: United Nations Asia and Far East Institute for the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders.
United States Department of Justice (2002). Searching and seizing computers and obtaining electronic evidence in criminal investigations. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice. Retrieved July 6, 2005, from http://www.cybercrime.gov/s&smanual2002.htm.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This paper was commissioned by the Organizing Committee and written by Professor Peter Grabosky, BA, MA, PhD, FASSA, Australian National University.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Grabosky, P. Requirements of prosecution services to deal with cyber crime. Crime Law Soc Change 47, 201–223 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-007-9069-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-007-9069-1