Prepared by the researche :Habib Tayeh Al-Shammari – Assistant Professor. Raja Hussein Abdul Amir – Al-Qasim Green University, Babylon 51o13, Iraq
Democratic Arabic Center
International Journal of Kurdish Studies : Seventh Issue – October 2024
A Periodical International Journal published by the “Democratic Arab Center” Germany – Berlin
:To download the pdf version of the research papers, please visit the following link
Abstract
Our current era is witnessing a wide development in the field of using communication technology, and the accompanying rapid development and spread in its use and the creation of a new form of social communication via the Internet, which led in parallel to the emergence of a new pattern of practices that the legislator deemed necessary to control to prevent harm to the interests of the public and individuals and to provide the necessary protection for users of the Internet and various information systems with a special law that is compatible with its nature. Perhaps what distinguishes these crimes from others is not in the nature of the punishable act, but in the means used in committing it, which prompted the legislator to search for “the deterrence intended from the punishment due to the increase in this type of crime.
Introduction
To give an initial idea about the research topic, we will show that in several paragraphs.
First / Definition of the research topic
Recent decades have produced a revolution of another kind related to means of communication and information, as a result of the development that was mainly embodied in the spread of highly developed computers, advanced programs, and communication networks that brought millions of people closer together, and provided new opportunities to view and exchange information, and even negotiate and conclude various contracts, especially via the Internet. Moreover, through the latter, products such as programs, musical pieces, or electronic newspapers can be delivered, or services such as legal or medical consultations can be provided.
However, as long as crime is a social phenomenon, its nature and size are affected by economic, social, and cultural transformations internationally and nationally, a new type of crime has emerged, embodied in the spread of information or electronic crimes, which are considered one of the greatest negatives left by the information revolution, because these crimes include in their attacks essential values related to individuals, institutions, and even countries in all aspects of life, and these crimes have also left in souls a feeling of mistrust regarding dealing with and benefiting from the fruits of this new revolution.
Second / The importance of the research
The importance of the research lies in the fact that electronic crimes are among the most dangerous contemporary crimes and their rapid spread, which affects the security and stability of Iraq, which requires finding means to limit these crimes.
Third: The research problem
Our research appears to show that the proposed cybercrime law violates international standards protecting due process, freedom of expression, and freedom of association, as it aims to provide legal protection for the legitimate use of computers and the information network, and to punish perpetrators of acts that constitute an attack on the rights of their users. Specifically, the law provides penalties for the use of computers in relation to many of the granted activities, such as financial fraud, embezzlement, money laundering, network disruption, illegal surveillance, and attacks on intellectual property. However, this law is not limited in its targeting to a limited scope. Rather, its provisions will criminalize the use of computers in relation to a wide range of activities that are loosely defined – many of which are currently not subject to rules without reference to any specific standards. By allowing individuals to be punished in this way, the provisions of the law appear to be in conflict with international law and the Iraqi constitution, and if implemented, it will constitute a serious reduction in the right of Iraqis to freedom of expression and association. Fourth / Research Methodology
To research the topic ((The Iraqi Electronic Crimes Bill between Rejection and Urgent Need)) we will follow the descriptive comparative approach, we will address the position of Iraqi legislation and compare it with Latin and Anglo-American legislation.
Fifth / Research Plan
We will divide our research entitled ((The Iraqi Electronic Crimes Bill between Rejection and Urgent Need)) into two requirements, in the first requirement we will address the nature of electronic crimes, in terms of definition and nature of electronic crimes, and in the second requirement we will address the legal framework of electronic crime, in which we will address the position of the Iraqi legislator on information crimes and the position of comparative legislation.
The first requirement
The nature of electronic crimes
In order to identify the nature of electronic crimes, we must first identify its concept by defining it specifically and then stating its characteristics and nature in two sections. In the first, we will define it and in the second, we will determine the nature of the electronic crime.
The first section
Definition of electronic crimes
To clarify the definition of electronic crimes, we will discuss this title in the first paragraph, Definition of electronic crimes and the second, Characteristics of electronic crimes.
First / Definition of electronic crimes
Jurisprudence did not agree on a comprehensive definition of electronic crimes, so we will review what jurisprudence has provided in terms of definition.
Definition of crime as all forms of unlawful behavior committed using a computer ([1] ).
It was also defined as an unlawful activity directed at copying, interpreting, deleting, or accessing information stored inside the computer or transferred through it ([2] ).
It was also defined as an unlawful act and knowledge of information technology is essential for the perpetrator, investigation, and prosecution ([3] ).
It was also defined as legal attacks that can be committed by electronic means for the purpose of achieving profit ( [4]).
The United Nations Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development has defined cybercrime as any act or omission that would result in an attack on material and moral property, directly or indirectly, from the intervention of electronic technology ([5] ).
Some define it as any intentional act or omission that results from the illegal use of information technology that does not aim to attack material and moral property([6] ).
Second / Characteristics of cybercrime.
It appears to us from the legislation mentioned that cybercrime has characteristics that distinguish it from traditional crimes.
1) Difficulty in detecting and proving the crime
Cybercrime is characterized by the difficulty of detecting it, and if it is discovered, it is usually by chance. The reason for this is that it does not leave any external trace in a visible form, in addition to the perpetrator’s ability to destroy evidence of conviction in less than one second. What also increases the difficulty of proving these crimes is that they are usually committed in secret, and there is no written trace of the operations and actions that take place during their implementation ([7] ).
2) Multi-border cybercrime
This type of crime is known as border crime, as it may extend beyond the borders of its perpetrators to another country, and here arise problems of jurisdiction, procedures, challenges, and other points that are illuminated by cross-border crimes ([8]).
3) Method of committing cybercrime
The specificity of cybercrime is more clearly evident in the method and manner of its commission. If traditional crimes require some kind of actual effort that may take the form of practicing violence, as is the case in some traditional crimes such as theft and kidnapping, then cybercrime does not require violence by nature. Rather, all it requires is the ability to deal with a computer at a technical level that is used in committing illegal acts ([9] ).
4) Characteristics of the cybercriminal
The perpetrators of these crimes have distinctive characteristics in terms of culture and technological knowledge. The criminal in this type of crime is not ordinary, as he commits a special specialized crime, as this crime is represented by stealing encrypted information, which brings with it high technical expertise in this field. The cybercriminal can be a complete development of the crime, as the perpetrator can apply his crime to examples similar to those he witnesses before executing a crime, so that he is not surprised by unexpected matters that would comply with his plans or reveal them. It also unifies the feeling in the cybercriminal that with what he does, the enemies do not enter crimes, or in other words, this act cannot be characterized by immorality, especially cases in which the behavior stops at a computer system and bypasses the known computer around it, as the perpetrators of these crimes know between harming people, which they consider the ultimate in morality, and harming an institution or entity that is economically able to bear the results of its manipulation.
5) Lack of a common concept of cybercrime
There is no unified legal term to denote crimes arising from the independence of information technology and its use. Some call it the crime of information fraud, others call it the crime of information embezzlement, or information fraud, and others prefer to call it an information crime. The technological development has also resulted in the development of methods for proving and dealing with the crime. It is often easy to determine the place of commission of ordinary crimes, while it is very difficult to determine the location of the incident when dealing with cybercrimes,
system to another in a matter of seconds. There are no international or geographical borders that stand in the way of transferring files, documents and means over the Internet. As a result, determining which court and which law to apply will be a problem between countries, which requires cooperation between the countries of the world ([10]).
6) The occurrence of cybercrime during the automated processing of networks
One of the characteristics of cybercrime is that it occurs during the automated processing of data and information related to the computer. This system does not represent the basic condition that must be provided in order to investigate the occurrence or non-occurrence of the elements of cybercrime related to the attack on the data processing system, as in the event of the failure of this condition, it is called cybercrime, and cybercrime may occur during the automated processing of data at any of the basic stages of operating the automated data processing system, whether at the data entry stage, during processing, or during the information output stage ([11]).
7) Cybercrime is a new crime
Cybercrime is one of the most prominent types of new crimes that can pose serious dangers in light of information. It is no wonder that cybercrimes – whether they involve computers or use computers to commit them – are new crimes, as the technological progress achieved in recent years has made the world resemble a small village, so that this progress exceeds the state’s oversight agencies with its capabilities and potential, and even exceeds its ability to apply its laws in a way that threatens its security and the security of its citizens ([12]).
8) The possibility of multiple legal descriptions of the cybercrime site
The cybercrime site may appear in two forms, one of which is material. The second, as is the case with information, may be in a state of transfer or present in the memory of the electronic system, meaning that it is in a non-material state, and the form and effect is that non-material information by its nature can be subject to more than one legal text that it can be subject to, for example, considering it a literary work, which raises the problem of multiple legal descriptions of the same site ([13]).
The second section
The nature and nature of cybercrimes
The discussion of the legal nature of cybercrime revolves around the legal status of programs and information, which has reached its value in itself, not its value in that it is a newly created set of values that can be excluded and can be attacked in any way.
Accordingly, to clarify the legal nature, we will address the subject in two paragraphs: –
First/ Cybercrime of a special nature.
Second/ Cybercrime is a newly created set of values.
First: – Cybercrime of a special nature
This traditional trend sees that information has a special nature, based on an accepted fact that the description of value is applied to material things alone, in other words, the things described as values are the things that can be acquire, and by the concept of the opposite, and considering that information has a moral nature, it cannot, in this case, be considered among the values that can be acquired except in light of intellectual property rights ([14]).
Whatever the case, it is settled that there is an error when seizing information under the pretext of unfair competition, based on the ruling of the French Court of Cassation: “The purpose of the unfair competition claim is to ensure the protection of the person who cannot benefit from any exceptional right” ([15] ).
Second: Information is a newly created set of values
This modern trend sees[16] information as nothing but a newly created set of values based on the statement that information is based on the market price when it is not commercially prohibited, and that it is produced regardless of its material support from the work of the one who presented it, and that it is linked to works through a legal relationship represented in the relationship of the owner to the thing he owns, and it belongs to its author because of the adoption relationship that brings them together.
This opinion establishes two arguments to give a description of the value of information:
The first is the economic value of information, and the second is the existence of constructive relationships that bring together its author. There are also those who base this on two arguments, the first inspired by Bla Violle Roriber, which is that the idea of a thing or value has a moral image, and that the type of subject of the right can belong to a moral value of an economic nature, and be worthy of legal protection. As for the second argument, Professor Vivanti himself presents to us, where he sees that all things owned are moral property that are recognized by law and are based on the recognition that information has value, when they are of the type of patents, drawings, models, necessary collections, or copyright. The person who presents, reveals, and informs the group about something, regardless of the form or idea, is presenting them with information in a broad sense, but it is his own, and the latter must be treated as a value that becomes the subject of a right. There is no moral property without acknowledging the informational value. Therefore, he sees that the informational value is not the newly created thing, as it already exists in a group ([17]).
There are those who confirm that information, in view of its intrinsic truth and independence, is valuable in itself and certainly has a moral aspect, but it has a confirmed economic value, so that it can, when necessary, be raised to the level of value that can be illegally possessed ([18] ).
Second requirement
Legal framework of cybercrime
To clarify the legal framework of cybercrime, we will divide this requirement into two branches. In the first branch, we will discuss the position of the Iraqi legislator on cybercrimes, and in the second branch, we will discuss the position of comparative legislation.
First branch
The position of the Iraqi legislator on cybercrimes
After we have become aware of the nature of cybercrimes related to the automated information processing system in terms of them being global crimes and not international crimes, we will stop here to explain the position of Iraqi law on the concept of cybercrimes, in two paragraphs. In the first paragraph, we will discuss the position of the Iraqi Penal Code No. (111) of 1969, and in the second paragraph, we will discuss the draft Iraqi Cybercrimes Law.
First/ The position of the Iraqi Penal Code No. (111) of 1969.
Information crimes related to the automated information processing system in terms of being global crimes and not international crimes as global crimes, and the principle of the universality of criminal law or as some call it (comprehensive jurisdiction) means that the criminal law of the state is applied to every crime whose perpetrators are arrested in the territory of the state, regardless of the territory in which it was committed and regardless of the nationality of the perpetrator ([19]), and the officer applying this principle depends on a basic condition, which is that the crime for which the criminal will be punished is one of the crimes of a global nature, and this applies to information crimes, and the Iraqi legislator adopted the principle of (the universality of criminal law in Article (13) of the Iraqi Penal Code No. (111) of 1969, which states that, (In cases other than those stipulated in Articles 9, 10 and 11, the provisions of this law shall apply to anyone found in Iraq after having committed abroad, as a perpetrator or accomplice, one of the following crimes: sabotage or disruption of means of intelligence and communications International and trafficking in women, children, slaves or drugs).
It seems that the application of the text of Article 13 requires the availability of a set of conditions, which are: that a crime as stipulated in Article 13 occurs outside Iraq, and the perpetrator’s status as a principal or accomplice is irrelevant, and that the entry into computer or communications systems.
Secondly/ Iraqi draft law on information crimes.
The proposed law in Article (2) states that it aims to provide legal protection for the legitimate use of computers and information networks and to punish perpetrators of acts that constitute an attack on the rights of their users. Specifically, the law provides penalties for the use of computers in relation to many prohibited activities such as financial fraud and embezzlement (Article (7)), money laundering (Article (10)), network disruption (Article (14)), illegal surveillance (Article (15) (first) (b)) and (Article (16)), and attacks on intellectual property (Article (21). However, this law is not limited in its targeting to a limited scope. Rather, its provisions will criminalize the use of computers in relation to a wide range of activities that are loosely defined – many of which are currently not subject to regulations – without reference to any specific criteria.
By allowing the Iraqi authorities to punish individuals in this manner, Article 3 stipulates life imprisonment and a large fine for anyone who uses computers and the information network with the intent to harm the country’s independence, unity, safety, or its supreme economic, political, military, or security interests, or “participating, negotiating, promoting, contracting, or dealing with a hostile party in any way with the intent to destabilize security and public order or expose the country to danger.
” Article 6 stipulates life imprisonment and a large fine for anyone who uses computers and the information network with the intent to “incite sectarian or religious strife or sedition, or disturb security or public order, or harm the country’s reputation,” or publish or broadcast false or misleading facts with the intent to undermine confidence in the electronic financial system or electronic commercial and financial papers and the like, or harm the national economy and the financial confidence of the state.
” Article 21 stipulates a prison term of no less than one year for anyone who attacks any religious, moral, family or social values or principles or the sanctity of private life through the information network or computers in any way.
Article 22 stipulates a penalty of imprisonment and a fine for anyone who…establishes, manages or helps establish a website on the information network to promote and incite immorality and debauchery or any programs, information or films that violate modesty or public morals or calls for or promotes them. The provisions of the law appear to conflict with international law and the Iraqi constitution, and if implemented, will constitute a serious curtailment of Iraqis’ right to freedom of expression and association. The proposed cybercrime law is part of a broader pattern of restrictions on fundamental freedoms in Iraq, especially freedom of expression, freedom of association and freedom of assembly. The proposed cybercrime law also violates Articles 9 and 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 14 of the most recent version of the Arab Charter on Human Rights on due process, both of which protect the right to liberty and due process. ([20] ).
Under these provisions of international law, Iraq must provide individuals with procedural and substantive guarantees against arrest, detention, conviction, or arbitrary detention. The United Nations Human Rights Council, which also includes independent experts tasked with amending the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and assessing state compliance with it, has stated that in order for a law to be non-liquidating, it must be formulated with sufficient precision to enable the individual to control his or her property in accordance with its provisions. Accordingly, excessively vague laws that serve to direct the conduct of an individual or official are laws that are inconsistent with due process, and violations of the provisions of international law cited by flags. Citizens must know in advance what specific types of conduct may be subject to punishment and on what criteria they are based. ( [21]).
Section Two
The position of comparative legislation
We will discuss the position of comparative legislation in two paragraphs, the first paragraph is the Latin systems, and in the second paragraph, the Anglo-American systems.
First / Latin systems
In France, there are multiple legislative rules to which cybercrime is subject in French law. This type of crime is governed by legal rules of higher value than the legal rules in French law, represented by the rules of European law, while the new French Penal Code No. 92-136 issued on December 16, 1992 addressed cybercrimes with independent texts in Chapter Two, and in three axes. The first aims to protect the information systems themselves. The second axis includes protecting documents from forgery, while the third axis includes deterrence and increasing punishment in order to prevent these crimes. The French legislator added, by virtue of the amendment issued in 1994, a third chapter to the second part of the third section of the Penal Code under the title of attacks on automated processing systems. In Italy, the legislator added to the Penal Code issued in 1930, item (615) under the name of prohibition. In Greece, the legislator added to the Penal Code issued in 1950, Article (370), which criminalizes the illegal entry of information and data. In Mexico, item (2) Section 211 was added to the Penal Code, which relates to the prohibited entry into a private computer. Items (3, 4, 5) Section 211 were also added, which relate to the prohibited entry into computers in the Mexican government or Mexican financial systems. As for item (7) Section 211, it was allocated to penalties. In Austria, a special information regulation was issued in 2000, which is included in the tenth section of the Penal Code, Article (52) of this law. In the Czech Republic, the rules of the Criminal Code based on cybercrimes were applied in Articles (182, 249, 257a). In Finland, the legislator added Chapter (38) to the Penal Code, which criminalizes acts of assault on data and information. In Estonia, the legislator added some texts to the Penal Code, including (Article 269), which punishes the destruction of computer programs and data, Article (270), which criminalizes acts of computer sabotage, Article (271), which punishes the misuse of computers, and Article (273), which prohibits the spread of computer viruses. In Japan, the Computer Access Prohibition Act No. 128 was issued, which went into effect on February 3, 2000. Article 3 criminalized any act of prohibited access to a computer, while Article 4 criminalized any act that facilitates prohibited access to a computer. Articles 8 and 9 included penalties. Section 300 C was added to the Hungarian Penal Code and was called fraud or deception related to computer programs([22]).
In Tunisia, the Electronic Commerce and Exchanges Law was issued in 2000, in which the Tunisian legislator addressed the provisions of electronic contracts and transactions, and also addressed crimes that occur in this trade and electronic transactions in the United Arab Emirates. In 2002, the Copyright and Related Rights Law was issued in the Emirate of Dubai. Electronic Commerce Law No. 2 of 2002 was issued, which regulates electronic transactions, electronic signatures, and the legal protection provided for them within the scope of the Emirate of Dubai. In Egypt, no special law was issued for cybercrimes, but the legislator resorted to organizing this subject in some special legislation, including the new Civil Status Law No. 143 of 1994, the Copyright Protection Law, which introduced important amendments in this area under Law No. 29 of 1994, and the Electronic Signature Law No. 15 of 2004, which organized the provisions of the electronic signature and the criminal protection provided for it. In the Sultanate of Oman, a special legislation was issued for computer crimes, where Article 376 punishes the acts of illegal collection of information, destruction, alteration and erasure of information, leakage of information and violation of the privacy of others, etc. While Article 276 bis (1) punishes anyone who illegally obtains data belonging to others. Article 276 bis (3) punishes anyone who imitates or forges debit or payment cards or uses or attempts to use a forged or counterfeit card knowingly([23]).
Second: Anglo-American systems
In the United States of America, several laws and legislations were issued specifically to address some cybercrimes, the most important of which are the Person Reporting Act issued in 1970, the Privacy Act issued in 1974, the Privacy, Family and Educational Rights Act issued in 1974, the Freedom of Information Act issued in 1976, the Theft Protection Act of 1980, and the Telecommunications Policy Act of 1984, which aims to protect the privacy of subscribers to the telephone service via the Internet. As for the American Penal Code, it was one of the first legislations that addressed cybercrimes. It can be said that the United States of America has completed its legislative structure by the end of the twentieth century regarding the legislation governing electronic transactions and confronting cybercrime, whether in its local legislation at the state level or the federal legislation at the federal state level. Perhaps the most recent of these legislations is the Electronic Signature Act issued in 2000. In India, legislation for information technology was put in place under No. 21 of 2000 and was placed in the first chapter of the Penal Code, included in Article 66, and called hacking of the computer system. In Norway, the Penal Code includes new articles, namely Article 145, which punishes unauthorized access to documents, and Article 151, which punishes the destruction of data and information, which are subject to several aspects, including the storage, destruction or demolition of the information system. In Portugal, the Criminal Information Law was issued on August 17, 1991, and included in the first section Article 7 related to information crimes. In Poland, Articles 367, 268, and 369 were added to the Penal Code, all of which relate to prohibiting access to systems and misuse of data and information. In Ireland, the Criminal Destruction Act was issued in 1991 and was placed in the fifth section, punishing the person allowed to access the computer from tampering with data and information([24]).
Conclusion
In the conclusion of our research, we will show the most important results and proposals that we have reached.
First/ Books
1- The proposed Information Crimes Law is part of a broader pattern of restrictions on basic freedoms in Iraq, especially freedom of expression, freedom of association and freedom of assembly.
2- The proposed law poses a serious threat to the rights and freedoms of individuals
3- The wording of the draft texts was not accurate, the terms with broad and ambiguous meanings, expanding their interpretation restricts freedoms and narrowing their interpretation leads to many escaping punishment
Second/ Proposals
1- Issuing new legislation or amending existing penal legislation to confront information crimes by determining crimes and specifying appropriate penalties for them in order to protect the information system.
2- Amending the proposed legislation to comply with constitutional and international standards by defining any prohibited behavior with sufficient accuracy, especially in Articles 3, 6, 21, 22 so that Iraqi citizens know in advance what is prohibited behavior and subject to punishment.
3- The necessity of ensuring that any legal restriction on the freedom to form associations is proportionate in terms of scope, time and criminal penalty to the damage caused.
4- Finding new evidence that is compatible with the nature of these crimes due to the inadequacy of traditional evidence in criminal law to prove them.
Sources
First / Authorship
1- Dr. Ahmed Khalifa, Information Crimes, Dar Al Fikr Al Arabi, Alexandria, without year of publication.
2- Dr. Osama Abdullah, Criminal Protection of Private Life and Information Banks, Dar Al Nahda Al Arabiyya, Cairo, 1999.
3- Dr. Hijazi Abdel Fattah Bayoumi, Computer and Internet Crimes, Dar Al Kotob Al Qanuniya, Egypt, 2004.
4- Dr. Khaled Ibrahim Mamdouh, Information Crimes, 1st ed., Dar Al Fikr Al Jami’i, Alexandria, 2009.
5- Abdel Fattah Bayoumi, Combating Computer and Internet Crimes, the Arab Model Law, 1st ed., Dar Al Fikr Al Jami’i, Alexandria, 2006.
6- – Dr. Abdullah Abdul Karim, Information Crimes and the Internet, 1st ed., Al Halabi Legal Publications, Beirut, 2011.
7- Fakhri Abdul Razzaq Ali Al Hadithi – Explanation of the Penal Code – General Section, Baghdad, 1992.
8- – Dr. Mohamed Abdullah Abu Bakr, Encyclopedia of Information Crimes, 1st ed., Modern Arab Office, Alexandria, 2011.
9- Dr. Mohamed Ahmed, Computer Crimes and Their International Dimensions, 1st ed., Dar Al-Thaqafa, Amman, 2005.
10- Dr. Mounir Mohamed Al-Junaihi, Internet and Computer Crimes and the Means of Combating Them, 1st ed., Dar Al-Fikr Al-Jami’i, Alexandria, 2006.
11- Dr. Mohamed Ali Al-Aryan, Information Crimes, 1st ed., Dar Al-Jamia Al-Jadida for Publishing, 2004.
12- Dr. Mohamed Sami Al-Shawa, The Information Revolution and Its Implications on the Penal Code, 1st ed., Dar Al-Nahda Al-Arabiya, Cairo, 1994.
13- Dr. Nahla Abdel Qader Al-Momani, Information Crimes, 1st ed., Dar Al-Thaqafa for Publishing and Distribution, Amman, 2008.
14- Dr. Naila Adel, Economic Computer Crimes, 1st ed., Al-Halabi Publications, Beirut, 2010.
15- Dr. Hoda Hamed, Cybercrimes, 2nd ed., Dar Al-Jamia Al-Jadida, Alexandria, 2009.
Second/ Research
1- Dr. Samira Maashi, The Nature of Cybercrime, Legal Forum, Journal of the University of Mohamed Kheder, Issue 7, Biskra, Algeria, 2009.
2- Dr. Sami Al-Shawa, Cyber Fraud as a New Criminal Phenomenon, Research at the Conference of the Egyptian Society of Criminal Law, Cairo, 1993.
Third/ Theses
1- Dr. Hamza Bin Affan, Criminal Behavior of Cybercriminals, Master’s Thesis Submitted to the University of Batta, Faculty of Law, Algeria, 2006.
Fourth/ Reports
1- Human Rights Watch report is available on the website, ar/org.hrw.www://h, Visited on 4/1/2023, 4:46 PM.
Fifth / Laws
1- Iraqi Penal Code No. (111) of 1969.
2- French Penal Code No. 92 – 136 of 1992.
3- Japanese Computer Access Ban Law No. (128) of 2000.
4- Tunisian Electronic Commerce and Exchange Law of 2000.
5- US Telecommunications Policy Act of 1984.
[1] – Dr. Munir Muhammad Al-Junaihi, Internet and Computer Crimes and the Means of Combating Them, 1st ed., Dar Al-Fikr Al-Jami’i, Alexandria, 2006, p14.
[2] – Dr. Hoda Hamed, Cybercrimes, 2nd ed., New University House, Alexandria, 2009, p. 170.
[3] -Dr. Sami Al-Shawa, Information Fraud as a New Criminal Phenomenon, a paper presented at the Egyptian Society of Criminal Law Conference, Cairo, 1993, p. 516.
[4] – Dr. Abdullah Abdul Karim, Cybercrimes and the Internet, 1st ed., Al-Halabi Legal Publications, Beirut, 2011, p. 15.
[5] – – Dr. Muhammad Ahmad, Computer Crimes and Their International Dimensions, 1st ed., Dar Al Thaqafa, Amman, 2005, p. 1.
[6] – Dr. Hamza bin Affan, Criminal Behavior of the Cybercriminal, Master’s Thesis submitted to the University of Batna, Faculty of Law, Algeria, 2006, p. 1.
[7] – Dr. Nahla Abdul Qader Al-Momani, Cybercrimes, 1st ed., Dar Al-Thaqafa for Publishing and Distribution, Amman, 2008, p. 54.
[8] – Dr. Abdullah Abdul Karim, previous source, p. 33.
[9] – Dr. Nahla Abdel Qader, previous source, p. 57.
[10] – Dr. Osama Abdullah, Criminal Protection of Privacy and Information Banks, Dar Al Nahda Al Arabiya, Cairo, 1999, p. 322.
[11] – Dr. Hijazi Abdel Fattah Bayoumi, Computer and Internet Crimes, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Qanuniyah, Egypt, 2004, p. 148.
[12] – Dr. Naila Adel, Economic Computer Crimes, 1st ed., Al-Halabi Publications, Beirut, 2010, p. 55.
[13] – – Dr. Khaled Ibrahim Mamdouh, Information Crimes, 1st ed., Dar Al-Fikr Al-Jami’i, Alexandria, 2009, p. 76.
[14] – Dr. Mohamed Abdullah Abu Bakr, Encyclopedia of Cybercrimes, 1st ed., Modern Arab Office, Alexandria, 2011, p. 75.
[15] – – Dr. Samira Maashi, The Nature of Cybercrime, Legal Forum Place, Mohamed Kheder University Journal, Issue 7, Biskra, Algeria, 2009, p. 279.
[16] – Dr. Muhammad Ali Al-Aryan, Cybercrimes, 1st ed., New University Publishing House, 2004, p. 49.
[17] – Dr. Samira Maashi, op. cit, p. 278.
[18] – Dr. Muhammad Sami Al-Shawa, The Information Revolution and its Implications on the Penal Code, 1st ed., Dar Al-Nahda Al-Arabiya, Cairo, 1994, p. 180.
[19] — Fakhri Abdul Razzaq Ali Al-Hadith – Explanation of the Penal Code – General Section, Baghdad, 1992, p. 96.
[20] – The Human Rights Watch report is available on the website, www.hrw.org/ar/, accessed on 4/1/2023, at 4:46 p.m.
[21] – Same source.
[22]– Quoted from Dr. Ahmed Khalifa, Cybercrimes, Dar Al Fikr Al Arabi, Alexandria, no year of publication, p. 168.
[23] – – Quoted from Abdel Fattah Bayoumi, Combating Computer and Internet Crimes, the Arab Model Law, 1st ed., Dar Al Fikr Al Jami’i, Alexandria, 2006, pp. 105-160.
[24] – – Quoted from Abdel Fattah Bayoumi, previous source, pp. 166-180.
