Which lawmakers have jurisdiction over actions taking place on the internet? 1

CLN4U
Final Culminating Essay
April 15th 2016

Topic: hich lawmakers should have jurisdiction over actions taking place on the internet?
W

Which lawmakers have jurisdiction over actions taking place on the internet? 2 It’s a new world, an electronic world, a world in which laws are being made and broken on the world wide web. The questions at hand are: who should have control over creating and enforcing these laws on the internet? Who should be held accountable? In the 21st century, countries reserve the right to pass legislation upon their government’s discretion, however, there is a community of nations, aptly named the United Nations (UN), that have created a universal commission which defines the legal responsibilities of states in their treatment of individuals within their borders. This is named the International Law Commission. The International Law
Commission sets out guidelines and regulations for member states to follow, however, the commission is just a guideline, meaning that each country has the right to prosecute criminals within their border upon their discretion. The nature of illegal internet activity is based around anonymity, a person may use several servers based in various countries around the world in order to hide their IP address and origin, a method called “bouncing your IP address”. It is oftentimes impossible to track the location of these criminals, which raises an issue of countries potentially overstepping their jurisdiction when investigating an international cyber­crime.
Another issue is that the participation of multiple countries’ cyber­crimes units may cause political pressure. Countries may be scrutinized for their legislation if the legislation relates to the particular cyber crime being investigated. For example, if a cyber­crime is being investigated by country X and the suspect is located in country Y, he may not be prosecuted because that particular crime is not illegal in country . Lastly, private corporations which own their own servers/websites are responsible for ensuring the integrity of their content from a legal standpoint, in accordance with their country’s law. Should these corporations be held liable for illegal activities that occur on their websites?
In order to combat these issues, cyber­crimes should fall under the jurisdiction of the United
Nations (UN) and the International Criminal Court, in compliance with International Law.

Which lawmakers have jurisdiction over actions taking place on the internet? 3 Internet crime or “Cyber­crime” is an expected phenomenon of the 21st century. Crimes are being committed from millions of miles away, by people sitting at their computers which hide their physical location from law enforcement. Moreover, a citizen of one country may break the law of another country, however, they won’t be prosecuted because either their physical location cannot be traced or the legislation of their country of origin isn’t being violated. According to
Schultz’s Essay (2008), “If this approach was followed globally, then websites would be subject only to the law of the state from which the flow of information stems” (Paragraph 59).
A more effective and efficient body of law to use for cyber­crimes is International Law because it can be applied universally to every person, no matter their physical or online location. A universal body of law could prevent the overstepping of jurisdiction and political tension.
Furthermore, according to Rosenblatt’s paper on
Principles of Jurisdiction (2016): “There is little

dispute that nation­states can prosecute Internet users (or anyone else, for that matter), whatever their location, for revealing national secrets, falsifying official documents, or inciting war. These activities threaten national security, wherever they are committed, and therefore fall under international standards for jurisdiction” (Section B).

The current system of investigating cyber­crimes relies solely on the collaboration of multiple government agencies and their respective cyber­crimes units. These government

Which lawmakers have jurisdiction over actions taking place on the internet? 4 agencies may work with each other on individual cases of primary importance, such as a manhunt, or they may collaborate with other countries and share resources. Either option requires a significant amount of time and resources.The nature of cybercrime is an international affair ­ criminals and hackers never keep all of their information in one place, therefore, efficient collaboration between countries is necessary for investigating international cyber­crime.
For example, an online perpetrator may use multiple servers, situated in multiple countries, to keep their files, information, and location a secret. Government agencies which don’t collaborate with one­another will never gain access to all of this information because their jurisdiction is limited ­ half of the information may be stored on a server in another country. On the other hand, agencies which do collaborate with each other may gain access to all of the information, but the process may waste a significant amount of time and resources, leaving more room for error.
According to Schultz’s Oxford Journal (2008), “To reconcile these two imperatives – to protect local values without encroaching on the territory of other states – is the fundamental problem of state intervention on the Internet” (Paragraph 48). All cyber­crimes occur on the world wide web, a system which uses physical devices called servers for the distribution of information. A large corporation may own hundreds of servers which store their private information, anything from employee records and passwords to document scans and contracts. All of this information is stored on physical servers. Company websites can also be hosted on company servers, which means that any illegal activities that occur on these companies’ websites/servers, directly extends liability to that company.
For example, an employee of company X, based in the United States, may have their payroll sent to a bank in the Cayman Islands and away from United States jurisdiction, for tax evasion

Which lawmakers have jurisdiction over actions taking place on the internet? 5 purposes. The liability may rest either on the individual, for tax fraud, or on the company, for negligence (if the company didn’t report the suspicious activity in a timely manner).
The question arises: should private corporations be held accountable, due to negligence, for cyber­crimes occurring on their servers? Companies themselves influence the access to information of individuals, according to the United Nations General Assembly Report (2011, May
16), “Given that Internet services are run and maintained by private companies, the private sector has gained unprecedented influence over individuals’ right to freedom of expression and access to information” (paragraph 44).In addition to influencing people’s right to freedom of expression, companies themselves are subject to international law, meaning that any negligence that occurs on their front can be scrutinized in accordance with international law.
According to Alvarez’ Essay (2010, March 12), “Every individual and every organ of society excludes no one, no company, no market, no cyberspace. The Universal Declaration applies to them all” (Page 10 Paragraph 39).
Justified as it is, a Universal Declaration (International Law) is set in place in order to deter capitalism from influencing democracy. Legislation is often passed in order to benefit private corporations, in turn, these corporations help balance that country's economy by providing domestic products and services. For example, the fast­food giant McDonald’s adds
Monosodium Glutamate (MSG) to their food which allows for lower production costs, however, the amount of “safe” consumption of this drug has been raised by the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) in order to accommodate McDonald's. According to Alvarez’s Essay
(2010, March 12), “Corporate speech is no less indispensable to decision making in a democracy than is any other form of speech” (Page 10 Paragraph 39). If private corporations are allowed to influence legislation then the entire legislative system of individual countries may

Which lawmakers have jurisdiction over actions taking place on the internet? 6 be corrupted. Cyber­crimes could use an International Declaration as opposed to individual countries’ legislation in order to combat this corruption. In conclusion, cyber­crimes should fall under the jurisdiction of the United Nations (UN) and the International Criminal Court, in accordance with International Law. This is necessary in order to avoid the negative influence of private corporations on government legislature. In addition, International Law is universal and, therefore, can be applied to every person no matter their geographical or online location. Lastly, the current collaboration of multiple government agencies is an ineffective system because it wastes time and resources, therefore, investigating cyber­crimes should be handled by a specialized cyber­crimes unit of the United Nations (UN).

Which lawmakers have jurisdiction over actions taking place on the internet? 7
References:

Alvarez, J. E. (2010, March 12). Are Corporations “Subjects” of International Law? Page 10
Paragraph 39. Retrieved from: http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/ECM_PRO_069097.pdf Rosenblatt, B. (2016). Principles of Jurisdiction on the Internet. Section B: Internationally.
Harvard Cyber Law. Retrieved from: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/property99/domain/Betsy.html Schultz, T. (2008). Carving up the Internet: Jurisdiction, Legal Orders, and the Private/Public
International Law Interface. European Journal of International Law. 19 (4): 799­839. Subjective
Territoriality, Paragraph 59. Retreived from: http://ejil.oxfordjournals.org/content/19/4/799.full Schultz, T. (2008). Carving up the Internet: Jurisdiction, Legal Orders, and the Private/Public
International Law Interface. European Journal of International Law. 19 (4): 799­839. Paragraph
48. Retreived from: http://ejil.oxfordjournals.org/content/19/4/799.full United Nations General Assembly. (2011, May 16). Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, United Nations
General Assembly, paragraph 44. Retrieved from: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/17session/A.HRC.17.27_en.pdf