Challenges for Australian Law Enforcement in Investigating and Prosecuting Cybercrime

CYBERCRIME 1
Q3. What are most significant challenges for Australian law enforcement investigating and
prosecuting cybercrime? Support your argument with multiple examples.
By; Student’s Name
Name of the Class and Course
Professor
Name of University
City and State
Date

CYBERCRIME 2
Due to the advancement in the field of technology, a new area of crime and a global
threat has emerged (Sarre, Lau and Chang 2018). Cybercrime lacks a clear definition in
academic phraseology. Some people refer to it as a computer crime, while others call it an
electronic crime, hi-tech crime, computer-related crime, technologically enabled crime,
cyberspace crime and even e-crime (Chang, 2012). Another scholar Grabosky (2007),
categorized 3 legal definitions of cybercrime from a study on legislation and common law. One
is where one uses the computer to perform a crime or crimes, the other is when the computer is
incidental to an offense, and in offenses where the computer is the objective of crime. Ms.
Chalortte Wood, the Cyber Intelligence Manager of the Australian Criminal Intelligence
Commission, defines cybercrime as ‘an intrusion on a computer, system or network for a
financial motivation’ (Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission, 2017). There are different
types of cybercrimes like hacking, ‘identity’ theft, cyber harassment, cyberstalking and
cyberbullying. A cybercriminal is a dangerous threat to the commercial activities done via the
internet. The greatest fear of governments is cybercriminal using the internet to perpetrate
terrorist attacks and surveillance (Sarre et al., 2017). The governments in different countries,
including Australia, have come up with legislation and measures so as to combat this digital
crime. Even though such provisions have been made, law enforcement still face challenges
during investigation and prosecution because of the borderless nature of the internet.
Enforcement of the law is difficult and sometimes impossible as the governments can be attacked
from any point in the world (Sarre et al., 2017). This piece of study is going to critically examine
the significant challenges that face the enforcement of the law against cybercrimes in Australia in
the investigation and prosecution of cybercriminals drawing on numerous available examples.
The 2013 Parliament gives a report stating that cyber threats were first acknowledged as a
national security concern in 2000 Defence White Paper (Austin & Slay 2016). An E-security
initiative was launched in 2001 by the Howard government to form a collaboration among
government agencies (Austin & Slay 2016). The 2009 Defence White Paper examined the
apparent threats of cyber warfare. A Cyber Security Strategy which led to the formation of Cyber
Security Operations Centre (CSOC) and CERT Australia was also released in 2009. In 2013, a
national plan to deal with Cybercrime was introduced. The priorities of the plan included :
‘educating the Australians on the steps to protect themselves, partnering with industry to tackle
cybercrime, fostering and intelligence-led approach and information sharing, improving the

CYBERCRIME 3
capacity and capability of government agencies to handle cybercrimes, improving international
engagement on cybercrime and ensuring criminal justice framework is effective (Attorney-
General’s Department, 2013). According to the Australian Cybercrime Online Reporting
Network (2017), there were 11,851 reported cybercrime cases between 1st April and 30th June.
Even though there are laws which have been enacted on cybercrimes in Australia, there is an
implementation problem and this is due to the challenges that the law enforcement face during
the investigation and prosecution of the crimes. The laws in place also depict a lacuna in a case
dealing with jurisdiction especially when there are conflicting laws or non-existent regional
laws. The Cybercrime Act 2001 was enacted in Australia to improve the law relating to computer
offenses and for other resolves. This was after there was a discovery that the development of the
internet, as well as the proliferation of the computer technology, had led to the creation of new
opportunities for illegal activities. It is sad that this increase in technology use, as well as online
communication, poses a threat to increased criminal incidences and varieties of criminal
activities. These two are what poses a threat to the ability of the Australian legal system being in
a position to enforce its law in combating computer enabled crimes (Brenner, 2001).
Technology is important in different fields in Australia like health and commerce. There
are an increasing use and dependence on technology in this digital age. This increases the risk of
cyber crimes in the country. Electronic devices like smartphones, tablets, and laptops are used by
many people. Majority of the population also have access to the internet. The number of people
who can access the World Wide Web for either legal or illegal purposes keeps on increasing each
and every day (Moore, 2014). There were 28,439,277 internet users in Australia by June 30th,
2018 (Miniwatts Marketing Group, 2018). The internet has brought many great opportunities to
many different users like education and business. Electronic commerce plays a major role in the
global economy. It has a lot of profits. However, it has increased the rate of cyber crimes due to
the large number of customers who participate in online transactions (Stalans and Finn, 2016).
There are different government agencies which handle cybercrimes. The main
responsibility of the Australian Federal Police in combating cybercrime is to ‘prevent, disrupt,
deter and investigate cyber-related crimes’ according to the Commonwealth Criminal Code Act
1995. The APF Cybercrime unit has two distinct branches. One, the capability and strategy team
and secondly, the operations team (Australian Federal Police, 2016).The capability and strategy
team monitors and reports the progress and activities of the Australian Federal Police in

CYBERCRIME 4
accordance with the Cyber Security Strategy and the Government’s National Plan to Combat
Cybercrime while the Operations team is responsible for the investigation of cybercrime
incidents in Australia (Australian Federal Police, 2016). The Australian Criminal Intelligence
Commission works with the police to stop the cybercriminals from exploiting the citizens
(Australian Government, 2016). This commission is the system administrator of the Australian
Cybercrime Online Reporting Network (ACORN). ACORN is an online system where the
Australian citizens can report any cases of cybercrime (ACORN, 2018). The Cyber Security
Operations Centre increases awareness on cybersecurity, responds to cybersecurity threats, teams
up with the public and private sector to share information on cyber threats and provides
information and assistance to all the Australian citizens ACSC (2018). There are different
legislation in place which to deal with cybercrimes. Some of them are Crimes Act 1900,
Telecommunications Act 1979, The Criminal Code Act 1995 and Cybercrime Act
2001. However, cybercrime keeps on evolving due to the continuous advancement in
technology. This is one of the challenges posed to the Australian legal system. It is therefore
important for the government to have laws which accommodate these changes. The main
concern, nevertheless, is the effective of these laws in the investigation and prosecution of
cybercriminals. The ABC news reports that police as also barriers to the enforcement of the
cybercrime laws by failing to conduct investigations. ABC News reports that IDCARE managing
director Professor David Lacey had to intervene to help victims of fraud after the police failing to
contact them even after they had lodged complains of the same. He actually says “in our
experience, few will hear back from law enforcement” (ABC News, 2017). In others instances,
societal interests interfere that the new technologies create affect the prosecution. An example of
this is in the case of a young Victorian hacker in 1993 who pleaded guilty but still, the County
Court of Victoria ( Judge Smith) remarked that prosecutors were facing difficulties to respond
appropriately to these new interests (Smith, Grabosky and Urbas, 2004).
It is possible for a cybercriminal to be in a different country or continent and still manage
to harass a victim in another country (Kshetri, 2006). Regional laws on cybercrimes are therefore
necessary. The Cybercrime Act 2001 is a regional law. It was amended in 2012. The Cybercrime
Legislation Amendment Act 2012 is the only international treaty on cybercrimes. It enabled the
Australians to accede to the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime. It addresses the
borderless characteristic of cybercrimes by pursuing a common criminal policy. However, the