Technological innovations and advancements shook the tectonic plates of that I.T. industry surprisingly and embarked on a new digital era that is advancing. These technological innovations along with a lot of positive and constructive roles in the daily lives of human beings paved the way for newly interconnected cyber-crimes at national and international levels.
The industrial sector of I.T. has been revolutionized, especially after the post-industrial revolution. The beginning of a new era of technology has made nation-states more aware of the instant need for legislation related to cyber-crimes in order to prevent existential computer-crimes to maintain the situation of law and order within their countries. However, technological innovations and advancements are still outpacing these legislative endeavors. For the purpose of addressing ongoing challenges of cyber security, governments all around the world are making great strides to reformulate or amend existing legal instruments. However, the problem of definition also clinched cyber-crimes and cyber-terrorism. Meanwhile, multiple terms have been coined to define cyber-crimes under the aegis of technological advancements such as electronic crime, computer crime, computer-related crime, hi-tech crime, technology-enabled crime, cyberspace crime and e-crime.
Countries have been working to formulate comprehensive cyber-crimes related laws in order to surmount computer crimes as well as to mitigate the effects of cyber-crimes. Pakistan is also one of those countries as she criminalized unauthorized and unlawful access to information system by passing the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016 for prevention of unauthorized acts related to information systems, criminalizing certain acts related to I.T. under the Pakistan Penal Code, defining investigation, trial and prosecutorial mechanisms with international cooperation.
On 16 December 2014, some terrorists affiliated with Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan attacked the Army Public School, Peshawar, KPK, and killed 114 children along with other school staff. In response to this brutal attack, the government of Pakistan took multiple stern measures and steps under the National Action Plan to curb terrorism and cyber-terrorism. So, passing the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016 to monitor, trace and prosecute this severe militant attack was one of those steps. The Situation of Pakistan after the APS can be compared with the situation of post 9/11 in the USA and the UK when the USA passed the Patriotic ACT 2001 and the UK adopted the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act under severe criticism of compromising civil liberties.
Clarity of language and terms with special reference to the intensity of offences for which the terms are being used in order to criminalize acts are pertinent elements. Vagueness in definitions and terms of this Act may create more hurdles to prevent the crimes for which an act is drafted, passed and then implemented. Desired fruits from such legislation could not be enjoyed by curbing desired crimes. The same lacuna can be found in section 10 of PECA 2016 in which cyber terrorism is constituted by “threat, coerce, intimidate, create sense of fear, panic, insecurity in the Government or the public or a section of the public sector or community or sector create a sense of fear or insecurity in society”. Furthermore, sub.section (b) of section 10 defines “inter-faith, sectarian or ethnic hatred” as ingredients of cyber terrorism. The language of section 10 of PECA 2016 confuses the intensity of terrorism with offences of less intensity such as hate speech, creating fear or panic related to Unauthorized access to critical infrastructure information system or data, Unauthorized copying or transmission of critical infrastructure data, Interference with critical infrastructure information system or data, and Glorification of an offence. The definition of cyber terrorism is broad enough as it loses its worth and intensity by ignoring offences associated with violence, injury and harm that must be redefined.
The government of Pakistan should address the problem of definition from section 10 of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016 by redefining cyber-terrorism and cyber-crime following the intensity and gravity of the commission of offenses. The terms such as inter-faith, sectarian, or ethnic hatred must be dealt separately under the Pakistan Penal Code. Other barriers regarding fair implementation of this Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016 in its true sense must be wiped out so that cyber-crimes can be stopped at the maximum level.
