10. Substantive criminal law provisions

2020 ◽  
pp. 173-188
Author(s):  
Ian J. Lloyd

This chapter examines the provisions of the Council of Europe’s Convention on Cybercrime to determine the major headings under which computer-related conduct might be prosecuted and to analyse the effectiveness of UK legislation in the field. The focus is on offences against the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of computer data and systems, which essentially refers to computer hacking and to attempts to impair the operation of computer systems through interception of communications, the promulgation of viruses, or the launching of denial of service attacks. The chapter discusses also the law on computer-related fraud and forgery.

Author(s):  
Ian J. Lloyd

This chapter examines the provisions of the Council of Europe’s Convention on Cybercrime to determine the major headings under which computer-related conduct might be prosecuted and to analyse the effectiveness of UK legislation in the field. The focus is on offences against the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of computer data and systems, which essentially refers to computer hacking and to attempts to impair the operation of computer systems through interception of communications, the promulgation of viruses, or the launching of denial of service attacks.


Author(s):  
R. Baranenko

Today cybercrime and computer terrorism are identified as one of the threats to Ukraine’s national security in the information sphere. Cybersecurity measures include achieving and maintaining security features in the resources of an institution or users, aimed at preventing relevant cyber threats. Cybercrime is a set of criminal offenses committed in cyberspace by computer systems or by using computer networks and other means of access to cyberspace, within computer systems or networks, as well as against computer systems, computer networks and computer data, has been widely developed. The paper considers such terms as «computer crime», «information crime», «crime in the field of computer information», «crimes in the field of information technology». Scientific works of domestic and foreign researchers on the issues of countering cybercrime are analyzed. The connection of the concept of «cybersecurity» with the terms «cybercrime», «computer crime» and «cybercrime» the concepts of «cybercrime» was given. The difference in the interpretation of the concepts «cybersecurity» and «information security» was considered. The definitions of «cybercrime», «computer crime» and «cyber offense» were given for comparison. Their main features were considered. The concept of «computer victimhood» and its components were considered. With the introduction of the institute of criminal offenses in the national criminal law, the terms «cybercrime» and «computer crime» should lose their relevance, as evidenced by the change of title of Chapter XVI of the Criminal Code of Ukraine to «Criminal offenses in the use of electronic computing machines (computers), systems and computer networks and telecommunications networks». Therefore, instead, we can recommend the use of the term «cyber offense», which we propose to understand as «socially dangerous criminal act in cyberspace and/or using it, liability for which is provided by the law of Ukraine on criminal liability and/or which is recognized as a criminal offense by international treaties of Ukraine, and cybercrime is a set of cyber offences». It is clear that this will require the introduction of appropriate terminological changes in the Law of Ukraine «On the Basic Principles of Cyber Security of Ukraine» and other regulations.


2020 ◽  
pp. 203-220
Author(s):  
Ian J. Lloyd

This chapter examines key forms of computer related crimes. Computer fraud is a topic that attracts much legal and media attention. As the name suggests, it is essentially a variant of well-established principles of this area of the law. If a perpetrator obtains funds belonging to a victim through some form of deception or manipulation, this will be considered criminal with the most significant legal issues being concerned with the question when or where an offence has occurred. The deliberate promulgation of computer viruses or malware is also generally regarded as a criminal offence although there are issues regarding the degree of intent that needs to be established to secure a conviction. Viruses are generally spread through the conduct of individuals other than those who create to program. Conduct might be characterized as negligent rather than deliberate and will generally not be criminal. Similar issues of intent and knowledge may arise in respect of other forms of conduct such as denial of service attacks.


1970 ◽  
pp. 35-37
Author(s):  
Tina Achcar-Naccache

For the first time, the Lebanese police began processing reported crimes on a computer data-base system in 1994. The first comprehensive statistics werereleased in 1995, The information in the data-base can be accessed by date, age, gender, location, and every type of crime recognized by Lebanese criminal law, including the latest to have entered the books. e.g., the buying and selling of children. a criminal activity that has flourished during and after the war. We now know how many rapes of virgins were reported. but we still do not know how manywomen have been battered by their husbands.


2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 213
Author(s):  
Budi Suhariyanto

Diskresi sebagai wewenang bebas, keberadaannya rentan akan disalahgunakan. Penyalahgunaan diskresi yang berimplikasi merugikan keuangan negara dapat dituntutkan pertanggungjawabannya secara hukum administrasi maupun hukum pidana. Mengingat selama ini peraturan perundang-undangan tentang pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi tidak merumuskan secara rinci yang dimaksudkan unsur menyalahgunakan kewenangan maka para hakim menggunakan konsep penyalahgunaan wewenang dari hukum administrasi. Problema muncul saat diberlakukannya Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2014 dimana telah memicu persinggungan dalam hal kewenangan mengadili penyalahgunaan wewenang (termasuk diskresi) antara Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara dengan Pengadilan Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Pada perkembangannya, persinggungan kewenangan mengadili tersebut ditegaskan oleh Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 4 Tahun 2015 bahwa PTUN berwenang menerima, memeriksa, dan memutus permohonan penilaian ada atau tidak ada penyalahgunaan wewenang (termasuk diskresi) dalam Keputusan dan/atau Tindakan Pejabat Pemerintahan sebelum adanya proses pidana. Sehubungan tidak dijelaskan tentang definisi dan batasan proses pidana yang dimaksud, maka timbul penafsiran yang berbeda. Perlu diadakan kesepakatan bersama dan dituangkan dalam regulasi tentang tapal batas persinggungan yang jelas tanpa meniadakan kewenangan pengujian penyalahgunaan wewenang diskresi pada Pengadilan TUN.Discretion as free authority is vulnerable to being misused. The abuse of discretion implicating the state finance may be prosecuted by both administrative and criminal law. In view of the fact that the law on corruption eradication does not formulate in detail the intended element of authority abuse, the judges use the concept of authority abuse from administrative law. Problems arise when the enactment of Law No. 30 of 2014 triggered an interception in terms of justice/ adjudicate authority on authority abuse (including discretion) between the Administrative Court and Corruption Court. In its development, the interception of justice authority is affirmed by Regulation of the Supreme Court Number 4 of 2015 that the Administrative Court has the authority to receive, examine and decide upon the appeal there is or there is no misuse of authority in the Decision and / or Action of Government Officials prior to the criminal process. That is, shortly before the commencement of the criminal process then that's when the authority of PTUN decides to judge the misuse of authority over the case. In this context, Perma No. 4 of 2015 has imposed restrictions on the authority of the TUN Court in prosecuting the abuse of discretionary authority.


Author(s):  
Ditlev Tamm

Abstract This contribution deals with the influence of the Reformation on the law in Denmark. The Reformation was basically a reform of the church, but it also affected the concept of law and state in general. In 1536, King Christian III dismissed the catholic bishops and withheld the property of the church. The king, as custos duarum tabularum, guardian of both the tablets of law, also took over the legislation for the church. Especially in subjects of morals and criminal law new principles and statutes were enacted. Copenhagen University was reformed into a protestant seminary even though the former faculties were maintained. For that task Johannes Bugenhagen was summoned who also drafted the new church ordinance of 1537. In marriage law protestant principles were introduced. A marriage order was established in 1582.


Jurnal Hukum ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 1592
Author(s):  
Hanafi Amrani

AbstrakArtikel ini membahas dua permasalahan pokok: pertama, kriteria yang digunakan oleh pembentuk undang-undang di bidang politik dalam menetapkan suatu perbuatan sebagai perbuatan pidana (kriminalisasi); dan kedua, fungsi sanksi pidana dalam undang-undang di bidang politik. Terkait dengan kriminalisasi, undang-undang di bidang politik yang termasuk ke dalam hukum administrasi, maka pertimbangan dari pembuat undang-undang tentu saja tidak sekedar kriminalisasi sebagaimana diatur dalam ketentuan hukum pidana dalam arti sebenarnya. Hal tersebut disebabkan adanya pertimbangan-pertimbangan tertentu. Pertama, perbuatan yang dilarang dalam hukum pidana administrasi lebih berorientasi pada perbuatan yang bersifat mala prohibita, sedangkan dalam ketentuan hukum pidana yang sesungguhnya berorientasi pada perbuatan yang bersifat mala in se. Kedua, sebagai konsekuensi dari adanya penggolongan dua kategori kejahatan tersebut, maka pertimbangan yang dijadikan acuan juga akan berbeda. Untuk yang pertama (mala prohibita), sanksi pidana itu dibutuhkan untuk menjamin ditegakkannya hukum administrasi tersebut. Dalam hal ini sanksi pidana berfungsi sebagai pengendali dan pengontrol tingkah laku individu untuk mencapai suatu keadaan yang diinginkan. Sedangkan untuk yang kedua (mala in se), fungsi hukum pidana dan sanksi pidana lebih berorientasi pada melindungi dan mempertahankan nilai-nilai moral yang tertanam di masyarakat tempat di mana hukum itu diberlakukan atau ditegakkan. Kata Kunci: Kebijakan, Kriminalisasi, Undang-Undang PolitikThis article discusses two main problems: firstly, the criteria used by the legislators in the field of politics in determining an act as a criminal act (criminalization); secondly, the function of criminal sanctions in legislation in the field of politics. Associated with criminalization, legislation in the field of politics that is included in administrative law, the consideration of the legislators of course not just criminalization as stipulated in the provisions of criminal law in the true sense. This is due to certain considerations. Firstly, the act which is forbidden in the administration of criminal law is more oriented to act is malum prohibitum offences, whereas in actual criminal law provisions in the act are mala in se offences. Secondly, as a consequence of the existence of two categories of classification of the crime, then consideration will also vary as a reference. For the first (mala prohibita), criminal sanctions are needed to ensure the enforcement of the administrative law. In this case the criminal sanction serves as controller and controlling the behavior of individuals to achieve a desired state. As for the second (mala in se), the function of criminal law and criminal sanctions is more oriented to protect and maintain the moral values that are embedded in a society where the law was enacted or enforced.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document