All for nothing?
For all the time it took, and all the hue and cry it caused, the cyber crime bill turned out to be about as disappointing as it could be. For one thing, it is clear that the government employed its least qualified people, when it comes to IT, to ‘process’ the draft. For another, the Bill is littered with vague benchmarks and qualifications when it comes to identifying cyber criminal activity. And, even more disturbingly, it has taken on far more powers than originally suggested; moving on from incorporating suggested crimes such as fraud, defamation, etc, to those that fall under the National Action Plan (NAP).
Unfortunately, that is not all. The IT world demands a special kind of expertise; one that is not found in your average legislator. Not only that, our justice machinery, in its present state, simply isn’t sophisticated enough to process cyber crimes. Therefore, not only has the government completely misdirected the intent of the Bill, but also bit off way more than it can chew, and will most likely handle cyber cases much the way it deals common criminal cases. To say that is cause for concern is but stating the obvious; a sentiment amply shared by cyber rights activists as well as opposition lawmakers.
In the end, this too was an exercise committed just for the sake of it. Yet again, much time and energy went into an effort that proved self-defeating. The government either does not have the inclination or it lacks the capability to understand the right way of pushing such initiatives through. It is advised that the government take a step back and lend a sincere air to loud cries of concern emanating from relevant quarters. The Prevention of Electric Crimes Bill (PECB) was meant to be a landmark achievement; and so much more was supposed to be built on it.
And the government only has itself to blame for yet another deadlock.
