Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
SUBMITTED BY
Sanjana S Rao
1316247
9BA.LLB C
GUIDED BY:
Ms. Diya C.R
Assistant Professor
School of Law
Christ University
1|Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION…………….....……………………………………………....4
1.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………………..4
1.2 Statement of Problem………………………………………………………………………5
1.3 Research Question…………………………………………………………………………5
1.4 Research Methodology…………………………………………………………………….6
1.5 Objective of study………………………………………………………………………….6
1.6 Significance of study……………………………………………………………………….7
1.7 Chapterisation plan…………………………………………………………………...……7
2|Page
4.3 Canada ……………………………………………………………………………………..
4.4 United Kingdom……………………………………………………………………………
4.5 India ……………………………………………………………………………………….
4.5.1 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973……………………………………………………….
4.5.2 Information Technology Act 2000……………………………………………………….
4.6 International Conventions………………………………………………………………….
3|Page
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 INTRODUCTION
In today’s world, the internet has revolutionised, its reach far more than any other form of
communication. But with this novelty also comes great risks, where this boon called the
internet can also be misused, giving rise to many criminal activities and instances of abetment
of criminal activities which have to be regulated. The basic nature of the internet is that it is
endless and has no boundaries. This is a primary characteristic of the internet and poses as a
severe problem when one speaks of the issue of jurisdictions.
Jurisdiction is the concept where by in any legal system, the power to hear or determine a
case is vested with the appropriate court. The main problem of cyber law jurisdiction is the
presence of multiple parties in various parts of the world who have only virtual nexus with
each other. Then the problem of place is raised that where the party wants to sue and what
remedy is available to him?
The inability of countries to effectively regulate the transactions on the internet originating or
ending within their territories stems from the nature of the technology itself. While countries
can seek to enforce their respective laws within their physical, geographical and political spaces
delineated on an atlas, a borderless cyberworld, controlled by technology that is constantly
changing, throws up several challenges. Even while it was thought that one could fix the
physical location of the computer from where the transaction originates and the one where it
ends, that too can be bypassed or ‘masked’ by technology. Thus, the applicability and
effectiveness of our existing laws need to be constantly reviewed so that we can ably face the
risks at present as the issues of jurisdiction and sovereignty become more and more relevant.
The Internet does not tend to make geographical and jurisdictional boundaries clear, but
Internet users remain in physical jurisdictions and are subject to laws independent of their
presence on the Internet. As such, a single transaction may involve the laws of at least three
jurisdictions:
a. The laws of the state/nation in which the user resides
b. The laws of the state/nation that apply where the server hosting the transaction is
located, and
4|Page
c. The laws of the state/nation which apply to the person or business with whom the
transaction takes place.
Thus, the author proposes the application of Universality Principle to deal with the issues that
arise from determining Jurisdiction. Jurisdiction is an aspect of State sovereignty and it refers
to judicial, legislative and administrative competence, in the case of cyber-crimes and although
jurisdiction is an aspect of sovereignty, it is not coextensive with it. Just because a country has
its sovereignty (both internal and external) intact does not mean it has unlimited jurisdiction
over all sorts of issues. The current international law limits a state’s right to exercise
jurisdiction. This makes international cooperation a prerequisite in order to tackle the issue of
Jurisdiction. International cooperation however must have the backing of the law and thus, the
principle of universal jurisdiction in respect to certain cyber-crimes and cyber terrorist
activities can be an effective way to ensure cooperation for the same.
1. Whether the current laws relating to Jurisdiction of cyber-crimes are effective and efficient?
2. Whether the Universality Principle can be applied to the law governing Jurisdiction of
cyber-crimes?
5|Page
1.4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The author adopts ‘Doctrinal method’ to present the position of law in India and other countries,
relating Jurisdiction in respect to Cyber Crimes, with the support of significant judicial
decisions of court in India and other countries. ‘Analytical method’ is employed to critically
analyse the effectiveness of the current law and in India and other countries. The author seeks
to appreciate the standards set and the principles formulated in other countries, particularly in
United States. In the concluding part of the paper, the applicability of the principle of
Universality is analysed and appreciated, and further suggestions are made in order to tackle
the issue.
2. To critically analyse the application of the principle of Universality to the current legal
regime governing Jurisdiction of cyber-crimes.
3. To suggest a reform in the current position of law in India as well as the International sphere.
6|Page
1.7 CHAPTERISATION PLAN
Chapter 1: Introduction
Under this chapter the author attempts to present the need for better laws due to the emergence
of cyber space and with it the increase of cyber-crimes. The author further shall point out the
unique nature of cyber-crimes and the inadequacy of the present legal regime.
7|Page
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 ARTICLES
8|Page
3. Paul N. Stockton & Michele Golabek-Goldman Prosecuting Cyber-Terrorists: Applying
Traditional Jurisdictional Frameworks to a Modern Threat, Stanford Law and Policy
Review, Volume 25, 2014, pp. 211-268:
The authors explore the legal issues that arise out of the prevalence and perpetration of
cybercrimes and cyber terrorism in the world over. They also discuss the inefficiency of the
traditional principles of jurisprudence, discussing in detail the frailty of the territoriality
principle in dealing with jurisdictional concerns in respect to cyber terrorism. The authors
further highlight the application of the Universality Principle and discuss its various drawbacks,
specifically citing the case of Filartiga v. Pena-Irala, 1 and Attorney-General v. Eichmann.2
4. David R Johnson and David G. Post, “Law and borders – The rise of Law in Cyber
space”, Stanford Law Review, Vol. 48, p. 1367, 1996:
The author explores the need to formulate a separate doctrine to govern the cyberspace.
According to the authors, the geographically devised legal territorial borders make sense in the
physical world but the cyberspace transcends these borders placing the power of sovereignty
in jeopardy. The application of traditional territorial doctrine to the cyberspace with unresolved
territory would raise many jurisdictional and substantive law issues. The issue can be tackled
by recognising cyberspace as a distinct “place” for purposes of legal analysis by recognising a
legally significant border between cyberspace and the “real world”. The authors assert that one
can reconcile the new law created in this space with current territorially based legal systems by
treating cyber jurisdiction as a distinct doctrine.
The author makes an analysis of the efforts made by courts in different countries to ‘localise’
issues relating to cyber-crimes in the process of exercising personal jurisdiction over
defendants located outside their territories. The author also highlights the anxiety of countries
and their courts to protect local citizenry from commercial or content based harm while at the
same time not wanting other countries to exert the same authority over its citizens. Keeping
this in view he analyses several important cases and landmark judgements in India as well as
1
Filartiga v. Pena-Irala, 577 F. Supp. 860, 863 (E.D.N.Y. 1984)
2
Attorney-General v. Eichmann, I.L.R. 18, 26 (Dist. Jerusalem 1961) (Isr.), aff’d, 36 I.L.R. 277 (S. Ct. 1962).
9|Page
internationally, highlighting the constant evolution of the cyber space and the need for laws
that have transnational jurisdiction and international cooperation as key features.
10 | P a g e
8. Yulia A. Timofeeva, Worldwide Perspective Jurisdiction in Internet Content
Controversies: A comparative analysis, 20 CONN. J. INT'L L. 199, 214 (2005):
The article discusses the various principles adopted by countries to deal with extraterritorial
jurisdictional issues. The article discusses the limitations, which are specific to the internet.
She opines that an international agreement on jurisdiction in Internet-related issues would be
the best solution.
10. “Cyberspace, Sovereignty and Jurisdiction” by Georgios I Zekos, The IUP Journal of
Cyber Law, IJCL10502, 2003:
The author emphasizes the need for revision of the meaning and substance of jurisdiction and
sovereignty of cyberspace. Cyberspace can have its own territory but it cannot exist outside the
State sovereignty. The author believes that by integrating the cyberspace territory with the State
territory, and State sovereignty with cyberspace sovereignty, Sate cyberspace sovereignty can
be created. There is a need for the establishment of cyber courts and tribunals with well-defined
jurisdiction. In such a case, universal cyberspace jurisdiction will enable the courts to decide
and enforce the foreign judgments.
2.2. BOOKS
1. S. K Verma and Raman Mittal, Legal Dimensions of Cyberspace, Indian Law Institute,
New Delhi, 2004:
The authors illustrate the various theories and principles of traditional jurisprudence followed
under international law and also state the applicability of the same in relation to the cyber
space. The book also illustrates the various stands and test followed by Courts in countries
such as the USA, the European Union and Canada. The authors also lay down the laws laid
11 | P a g e
down in India in respect to the authority of courts to adjudicate matters relating to cyber-
crimes.
2. C Vidya, Cyber Jurisdiction: A legal Vision , Amicus Books: ICFAI University Press,
Hyderabad, 2007:
The author suggests that the issue regarding jurisdiction can be confronted by bringing
coherence between independent judicial bodies to establish standard forms of jurisdiction.
Law-making and jurisdiction of cyberspace face new challenges because the changing facets
of the judicial system throughout the world. The author suggests that the relationship between
physical location and legally defined online information calls for an in-depth conceptual
understanding of jurisdiction in cyberspce.
12 | P a g e