The prosecution of cybercrime – why transnational and extraterritorial jurisdiction should be resisted

Paul Arnell, Bukola Faturoti

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Cybercrime is a scourge that blights the lives of many around the globe. It has a significant transnational component. Despite established international and national regulation, its growth in scale and breadth persists. One result of which has been increased recourse to transnational and extraterritorial jurisdiction. This is misplaced. There are a number of factors militating against it. The foundations of international law, human rights, the interests of justice, complexity and cost and the underlying purposes of criminalisation conspire to demand a reconsideration of the use of transnational and extraterritorial jurisdiction in the fight against cybercrime. While there are undoubted difficulties attendant to the alternative, enhanced subjective territorial regulation and enforcement, it is undoubtedly the most effective long-term means of fighting cybercrime. The normalisation of transnational and extraterritorial cybercrime jurisdiction should be resisted.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)29-51
Number of pages23
JournalInternational Review of Law, Computers & Technology
Volume37
Issue number1
Early online date8 Jun 2022
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 8 Jun 2022

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The prosecution of cybercrime – why transnational and extraterritorial jurisdiction should be resisted'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this