Convention on Cybercrime

The Convention on Cybercrime, also known as the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime or the Budapest Convention, is the first international treaty seeking to address Internet and computer crime (cybercrime) by harmonizing national laws, improving investigative techniques, and increasing cooperation among nations.[1][2] It was drawn up by the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, France, with the active participation of the Council of Europe's observer states Canada, Japan, Philippines, South Africa and the United States.

Convention on Cybercrime
CET 185
Ratified Convention on Cybercrime.svg
Countries that have ratified the treaty
Signed23 November 2001
Effective1 July 2004
ConditionRatification by 3 Council of Europe States
DepositarySecretary General of the Council of Europe
LanguagesEnglish and French

The Convention and its Explanatory Report was adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe at its 109th Session on 8 November 2001. It was opened for signature in Budapest, on 23 November 2001 and it entered into force on 1 July 2004.[3] As of December 2020, 65 states have ratified the convention, while a further four states had signed the convention but not ratified it.[4]

Since it entered into force, important countries like Brazil and India have declined to adopt the Convention on the grounds that they did not participate in its drafting. Russia opposes the Convention, stating that adoption would violate Russian sovereignty, and has usually refused to cooperate in law enforcement investigations relating to cybercrime. It is the first multilateral legally binding instrument to regulate cybercrime.[5] Since 2018, India has been reconsidering its stand on the Convention after a surge in cybercrime, though concerns about sharing data with foreign agencies remain.[6]

On 1 March 2006, the Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime came into force. Those States that have ratified the additional protocol are required to criminalize the dissemination of racist and xenophobic material through computer systems, as well as threats and insults motivated by racism or xenophobia.[7]



The Convention is the first international treaty on crimes committed via the Internet and other computer networks, dealing particularly with infringements of copyright, computer-related fraud, child pornography, hate crimes, and violations of network security.[8] It also contains a series of powers and procedures such as the search of computer networks and lawful interception.

Its main objective, set out in the preamble, is to pursue a common criminal policy aimed at the protection of society against cybercrime, especially by adopting appropriate legislation and fostering international cooperation.

The Convention aims principally at:

  • Harmonizing the domestic criminal substantive law elements of offenses and connected provisions in the area of cyber-crime
  • Providing for domestic criminal procedural law powers necessary for the investigation and prosecution of such offenses as well as other offenses committed by means of a computer system or evidence in relation to which is in electronic form
  • Setting up a fast and effective regime of international cooperation

The following offenses are defined by the Convention: illegal access, illegal interception, data interference, system interference, misuse of devices, computer-related forgery, computer-related fraud, offenses related to child pornography, and offenses related to copyright and neighboring rights.

It also sets out such procedural law issues as expedited preservation of stored data, expedited preservation and partial disclosure of traffic data, production order, search and seizure of computer data, real-time collection of traffic data, and interception of content data. In addition, the Convention contains a provision on a specific type of trans-border access to stored computer data which does not require mutual assistance (with consent or where publicly available) and provides for the setting up of a 24/7 network for ensuring speedy assistance among the Signatory Parties. Further, as conditions and safeguards, the Convention requires the provision for adequate protection of human rights and liberties, including rights arising pursuant to obligations under European Convention on Human Rights, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and other applicable international human rights instruments, and shall incorporate the principle of proportionality.[9]

The Convention is the product of four years of work by European and international experts. It has been supplemented by an Additional Protocol making any publication of racist and xenophobic propaganda via computer networks a criminal offense, similar to Criminal Libel laws. Currently, cyber terrorism is also studied in the framework of the Convention.

Accession by the United States

Its ratification by the United States Senate by unanimous consent in August 2006 was both praised and condemned.[10] The United States became the 16th nation to ratify the convention.[11][12] The Convention entered into force in the United States on 1 January 2007.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said: "While balancing civil liberty and privacy concerns, this treaty encourages the sharing of critical electronic evidence among foreign countries so that law enforcement can more effectively investigate and combat these crimes".[13]

The Electronic Privacy Information Center said:

The Convention includes a list of crimes that each signatory state must transpose into their own law. It requires the criminalization of such activities as hacking (including the production, sale, or distribution of hacking tools) and offenses relating to child pornography, and expands criminal liability for intellectual property violations. It also requires each signatory state to implement certain procedural mechanisms within their laws. For example, law enforcement authorities must be granted the power to compel an Internet service provider to monitor a person's activities online in real time. Finally, the Convention requires signatory states to provide international cooperation to the widest extent possible for investigations and proceedings concerning criminal offenses related to computer systems and data, or for the collection of evidence in electronic form of a criminal offense. Law enforcement agencies will have to assist police from other participating countries to cooperate with their mutual assistance requests".[14]

Although a common legal framework would eliminate jurisdictional hurdles to facilitate the law enforcement of borderless cyber crimes, a complete realization of a common legal framework may not be possible. Transposing Convention provisions into domestic law is difficult especially if it requires the incorporation of substantive expansions that run counter to constitutional principles. For instance, the United States may not be able to criminalize all the offenses relating to child pornography that are stated in the Convention, specifically the ban on virtual child pornography, because of its First Amendment's free speech principles. Under Article 9(2)(c) of the Convention, a ban on child pornography includes any "realistic images representing a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct". According to the Convention, the United States would have to adopt this ban on virtual child pornography as well, however, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, struck down as unconstitutional a provision of the CPPA that prohibited "any visual depiction" that "is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct". In response to the rejection, the U.S. Congress enacted the PROTECT Act to amend the provision, limiting the ban to any visual depiction "that is, or is indistinguishable from, that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct". 18 U.S.C

Accession by other non–Council of Europe states

The Convention was signed by Canada, Japan, the United States, and South Africa on 23 November 2001, in Budapest. As of July 2016, the non–Council of Europe states that have ratified the treaty are Australia, Canada, Dominican Republic, Israel, Japan, Mauritius, Panama, Sri Lanka, and the United States.

On 21 October 2013, in a press release, the Foreign Ministry of Colombia stated that the Council of Europe had invited Colombia to adhere to the Convention of Budapest.[15] In March 16th 2020, Colombia adhered to the Convention by filing the adhesion document from Colombia government in agreement with the Council of Europe.[16]

Although Egypt has not signed off on the Convention, Egyptian President Al Sisi's government in 2018 has legislated two major computer-crime related laws. Targeting Social networking service such as Facebook and Twitter, the legislation criminalizes fake news and terrorism, setting a flag on accounts which carry more than 5,000 subscribers or followers. The early legislation had been criticized by Amnesty International, thus websites can appeal to the courts within 7 days of blacklisting.[17][18][19]

In fact India too "was reconsidering its position on becoming a member of the Budapest Convention because of the surge in cyber crime, especially after a push for digital India."[6]

Related Developments

Russia in August 2021 has formulated and put forth a draft convention to the United Nations to fight cybercrime. The proposal is titled the “United Nations Convention on Countering the use of Information and Communications Technologies for Criminal Purposes”.

As per US State Department spokesperson, UN member states are beginning negotiations towards a new global treaty to combat cybercrime, which should take into account and preserve existing international agreements. The Russian recommendation is part of the proposed negotiating session in 2022. [20]

See also


  1. ^ Convention on Cybercrime, Budapest, 23 November 2001.
  2. ^ Star, Arizona Daily. "All Headlines" . Arizona Daily Star.
  3. ^ Staff. The COE International Convention On Cybercrime Before Its Entry Into Force Archived 2016-09-25 at the Wayback Machine, UNESCO, January–March 2004
  4. ^ "Full list" . Treaty Office.
  5. ^ "Assets" (PDF). April 30, 2016. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2016-04-30.
  6. ^ a b "Home Ministry pitches for Budapest Convention on cyber security" . January 18, 2018.
  7. ^ "Frequently asked questions and answers Council of Europe Convention on cybercrime Archived February 9, 2006, at the Wayback Machine", by the United States Department of Justice
  8. ^ Arias, Martha L., "The European Union Criminalizes Acts of Racism and Xenophobia Committed through Computer Systems Archived 2011-07-22 at the Wayback Machine", April 20, 2011.
  9. ^ Convention on Cybercrime, Article 15, 1
  10. ^ McCullagh, Declan; Anne Broache (4 August 2006). "Senate Ratifies Controversial Cybercrime Treaty" . Cnet.
  11. ^ Anderson, Nate (4 August 2006). ""World's Worst Internet Law" ratified by Senate" . Ars Technica.
  12. ^ Kaplan, Dan (4 August 2006). "Senate Ratification of Cybercrime Treaty Praised" . SC Magazine.
  13. ^ "Independent News & Media online" .
  14. ^ Electronic Privacy Information Center The Council of Europe's Convention on Cybercrime
  15. ^ "Consejo de Europa invitó a Colombia a adherir a la Convención sobre Delito Cibernético" . Cancillería. September 20, 2013.
  16. ^
  17. ^
  18. ^ "StackPath" .
  19. ^
  20. ^ "Russia proposes draft convention to fight cybercrime" . Arjun Ramprasad. August 5, 2021.

Further reading

External links


Information as of: 09.08.2021 05:21:49 CEST

Source: Wikipedia (Authors [History])    License of the text: CC-BY-SA-3.0. Creators and licenses of the individual images and media can either be found in the caption or can be displayed by clicking on the image.

Changes: Design elements were rewritten. Wikipedia specific links (like "Redlink", "Edit-Links"), maps, niavgation boxes were removed. Also some templates. Icons have been replaced by other icons or removed. External links have received an additional icon.

Please note: Because the given content is automatically taken from Wikipedia at the given point of time, a manual verification was and is not possible. Therefore does not guarantee the accuracy and actuality of the acquired content. If there is an Information which is wrong at the moment or has an inaccurate display please feel free to contact us: email.
See also: Legal Notice & Privacy policy.