Law to combat cyber crimes
NOW, we and computers are in infinite bonding with each other till the end of the world. It will be modernized, modified and upgraded bypassing every day and no one can detach us from its gravity.
Everyone will be scientific at least about its usage within a few years.
On the computer, beyond borders, we are connected, beyond walls we love and hate, and beyond strength we are expressive.
This is the time to know this thing before it engulfs us; one by one or all at once.
Literate or illiterate, poor or rich, busy or free, all are supposed to enjoy every limit of computers, day and night.
To combat its negative application, we must exercise our tools of defence and positivity in mind.
We need to know the concerning laws and their legal applications in case we are damaged.
Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016 was passed in Pakistan to save people from cyber bullying.
Centuries-old criminal justice framework needed more attention to frustrate the assaults of cosmopolitan online threats, spying and stealing identity information like data, messages, voice, sound, video, signals and codes.
The legislation establishes new penalties for newly arisen offences including hacking (illegal access to data), and interference with data and information systems (Dos and DDOS attacks).
Section 14 of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes, 2016 explains electronic fraud and states that, whoever, with the intent for wrongful gain, interferes with or uses any information system, devices or induces any person to enter into a relationship, or deceives any person, which act or omission is likely to cause damage or harm to that person or any other person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years or with fine which may extend to ten million rupees or both.
Wrongful gain means the gain of property to which the person is not entitled to gain. Property means anything possessed by the person who is the rightful owner.
The offence under Section 14 is non-cognizable, bail-able, compoundable and triable by the court.
A non-cognizable offence is an offence in which a police officer has no authority to arrest without a warrant.
The police cannot investigate without the court’s order. FIR can be lodged against the accused after the court’s permission.
According to Section 45 of this Act, the court may, in addition to awarding any punishment including a fine, make an order for payment of compensation to the victim for any damage or loss.
Section 47 extends the remedy in the shape of an appeal to the High Court against the final judgment of a Sessions Court within thirty days from the date of provision of its certified copy fee of cost.
If the judgment is passed by a Magistrate, the appeal will be filed to the concerned Sessions Court.
This Section deals with the assault or damage to the property and reputation of the victim.
The cyber crime wing of FIA gathers complaints, investigates the matter and files cases in courts, which results in punishment or fine or both. Any person who is trapped in a forced relationship can seek remedy against the accused.
Access to the investigating agency and court is not easy, especially for middle-class girls and boys.
The stage when you realize that you are tricked or pinned down; don’t get panicked, activate your thinking process, be attentive to the company around you, prudently select your advisor, save your records, collect the evidence and reach your lawyer.
The sessions judge or magistrate is required to take down the evidence into his own hands. Evidence would contain examination-in-chief, cross-examination, and re-examination.
Control of the gadget would be with the presiding officer who could pause it at any time for his clear understanding.
He would stop recording inadmissible evidence which would then not become part of the record.
Courts rely upon the truthfulness of evidence.It is the court which decides whether evidence has to be delivered or not and if believed, what weight should be given to it.
Law has given this discretionary power to the court.The tape recordings are admitted in evidence.
Even in the best circumstances, courts have been very cautious in admitting tape-recording on the ground that it is too unreliable and tempered.
To assure the accuracy of recording as evidence, the accuracy of recording has to be proved.
The voice recorded must be significantly identified.The court is cautious about all sorts of possible tempering and manufacturing.
The voice of the person speaking must be duly identified by the matter of the record or by others who know him.
‘Fraus et jus nunquam cohabitant’ is a pristine maxim which has never lost its temper all over the centuries.
—The writer is an Islamabad-based lawyer and a freelance contributor.
