The UN Cybercrime Convention: What it Means for Policing and Community Safety in Australia
The UN Cybercrime Convention, designed to enhance global cooperation against cybercrime, awaits adoption and necessitates at least 40 signatories by 2026. However, it raises concerns about the potential for increased surveillance and infringement on privacy and civil liberties.
The United Nations Convention on Cybercrime is a proposed global treaty designed to address the growing threat of cybercrime by establishing a framework for international cooperation. It represents a landmark achievement as the first global, legally binding instrument on cybercrime, developed over years of negotiation by UN Member States with contributions from civil society, academia, and the private sector. The Convention aims to create a coordinated global response to the misuse of information and communication technologies (ICTs) for criminal purposes. However, it has raised significant concerns, particularly regarding its broad scope, potential implications for privacy and civil liberties, and the risk of compromising state sovereignty. While the Convention awaits adoption by the UN General Assembly, its impact on global cybersecurity and the protection of human rights remains a contentious issue. The Budapest Convention, an existing European treaty, serves as a notable alternative, focusing on cross-border cooperation while safeguarding fundamental freedoms. If endorsed, the new Convention will require at least 40 signatories by 31 December 2026 to come into force.
Risks Associated with the Convention
While the UN Cybercrime Convention offers potential benefits, it also presents risks that demand careful consideration. The Convention’s provisions for secrecy and broad data access have raised alarms about potential negative consequences, particularly in relation to privacy and human rights. It introduces expansive surveillance powers, facilitates cross-border data sharing for various crimes, and lacks robust safeguards to protect civil liberties. These provisions risk being misused by governments to suppress dissent, infringe on press freedom, and target marginalised communities. The Convention’s deference to national laws and emphasis on secrecy further heightens these risks, making it crucial for states to thoroughly assess the human rights implications and implement stringent safeguards if they choose to adopt it. The broad scope of the Convention also poses challenges for journalists, whistleblowers, and IT professionals who, without clear safeguards, may face increased legal risks, thus impeding freedom of expression. Therefore, while the Convention aims to address cybercrime, its implications for privacy, civil liberties, and human rights require careful scrutiny.
Impact on Australia’s Policing and Community Safety
The UN Cybercrime Convention presents a double-edged sword for Australia’s policing and community safety. On one hand, it presents opportunities by enhancing international cooperation and providing a global framework to combat cybercrime, which could strengthen Australia’s efforts against transnational threats. As a nation with a proactive stance on cybercrime, Australia already defines cybercrime as both cyber-dependent and cyber-enabled crimes through robust legislation, including the Commonwealth Criminal Code Act 1995, and aligns its approach with the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime. However, the new Convention also introduces complexities, particularly around increased secrecy in data exchanges and potential impacts on privacy and civil liberties. Australia’s current strategies, like the 2022 National Plan to Combat Cybercrime, may need adjustments to ensure that the benefits of enhanced global collaboration do not compromise community safety or privacy.
Moreover, the Convention may impose substantial challenges on various sectors within Australia. The treaty’s broad provisions for data access and secrecy could undermine privacy and complicate the management of sensitive information, impacting businesses and tech companies with increased regulatory burdens and compliance costs. This could potentially stifle innovation and deter investment. Additionally, the risk of enabling cross-border surveillance by repressive regimes raises serious concerns about the potential misuse of international cooperation mechanisms, emphasising the need for Australia to carefully evaluate the Convention’s impact on its cybersecurity landscape and the protection of civil liberties.
What Stance Should Australia Have on the Convention
Australia should approach the UN Cybercrime Convention with caution, particularly considering its impact on policing and privacy. For example, the NSW Police Force focus on community safety (by reducing antisocial behaviour and addressing crime hotspots) and cybercrime (by designating it as a research priority) can be viewed as an indication of Australia’s commitment to addressing these concerns. The Convention’s provisions for broad data access and cross-border cooperation could potentially support such efforts by improving intelligence sharing and response capabilities. However, it is crucial that these benefits are weighed against the risks to privacy and civil liberties, as evidenced by the NSW Police Force Statement of Values. Policymakers must, therefore, ensure that any alignment with the Convention addresses cybercrime without undermining existing safeguards or leading to misuse of surveillance powers (such as monitoring and accessing digital data) by governments. By prioritising a balanced approach that enhances crime prevention and community safety while protecting individual rights, Australia can effectively navigate the complexities of the Convention and maintain public trust in its policing strategies.
The Implications of the Convention for Australia
The Convention has implications for Australia across various domains such as the economy, politics, education, and society. From an economic standpoint, it could lead to a financial burden, increased levels of data intercepts, interpretation, comparison and storage which would require the employment of highly skilled professionals, along with the costs associated with implementing cybersecurity measures for both government and private entities. Moreover, collaboration with developing nations may present challenges, such as in enforcement and information security, due to their limited technological expertise, capacity, and infrastructure. The Convention may also place an additional burden on the public and law enforcement institutions to educate staff and thoroughly investigate cybercrime issues. Furthermore, from a social and cultural perspective, human rights and indigenous knowledge and culture may be impacted during the investigation process. As an example, Indigenous communities (specifically referring to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples), with limited awareness of cybercrime, privacy, and security measures, and high levels of device sharing, may experience over-policing and under-reporting, further widening the divide between the state and Indigenous communities. Hence, it is crucial to closely monitor the Convention’s influence on these areas while combating cybercrime in the future.
Conclusion
The new Convention will significantly strengthen the combating of cybercrime at a global level by facilitating international cooperation and public private partnerships. The potential impact on human rights and civil liberties, however, requires close scrutiny by the international community. Australia’s implementation of the Convention’s provisions should, therefore, be approached with caution, ensuring that the community is protected as much as possible from the adverse effects of cyber-attacks, while still protecting the rights and liberties of that same community.
Dr Leo S.F. Lin, Dr Duane Aslett, Dr Geberew Tulu Mekonnen, and Mladen Zecevic are research and teaching staff at the School of Policing Studies, Charles Sturt University. The opinions expressed in this article are their own.
This article is published under a Creative Commons License and may be republished with attribution.
