Papua New Guinea Cybercrime Policy 2014      9.8     Other  Government  Stakeholders                 Other  relevant  stakeholders  not  specifically  mentioned  in  this  Policy,  including  PNG   Customs,  PNG  Immigration  and  Citizenship  Services,  and  Censorship  Board  will  also   have  an  equally  important  role  in  preventing  and  combating  cybercrime.     PART  TWO:    AREAS  OF  FOCUS     1.   Legislation   1.1     Development  of  National  Cybercrime  Legislation     The   Government   realises   that   in   order   to   prevent   and   combat   cybercrime   effectively,   legislation   must   be   enacted   that   criminalises   and   or   defines   conducts   that   constitute   cybercrime,  and  create  and  or  empower  relevant  agencies  to  address  the  issue.     Cybercrime   is   an   ongoing   priority   as   the   range,   frequency   and   scale   of  electronic   attacks   on  individuals,  businesses  and  the  public  sector,  continue  to  grow.    The  Government  is   aware   that   cybercrime   is   a   constantly   evolving   threat   and   legal   measures   will   require   concurrent  amendments  in  future  in  order  to  counter  such  threats.  Although  technical   solutions  such  as  firewalls,  encryption,  passwords,  etc.  may  be  effective,  these  must  be   complemented  by  adequate  legislative  measures.         Legislation   criminalising   certain   acts   or   conduct,   as   well   as   an   appropriate   procedural   framework   are   critical   in   enabling   law   enforcement   agencies   to   investigate   and   effectively   prosecute   such   crimes   in   Court.   This   approach   should   not   lead   to   over-­‐ criminalisation.       The  Government  aims  to  ensure  that  conduct  and  acts  committed  without  the  use  of  the   Internet,   are   also   criminalised   when   committed   in   an   electronic   environment   (e.g.   offensive   text   or   audio   messages,   obscene   images,   via   Bluetooth   and   MMS).     Acts   lawfully   carried   out   without   the   use   of   the   Internet   in   a   comparable   situation   should   only  be  criminalised  when  committed  with  the  use  of  electronic  devices,  provided  that   there  are  precedents  to  justify  such  an  approach.       Countries   that   are   without   an   adequate   legislative   framework   create   a   dual   level   of   risk.     On   a   national   basis   law   enforcement   agencies   will   not   be   able   to   support   citizens   that   have   become   victims   of   cybercrimes.     In   addition,   within   the   international   sphere   the   absence   of   legislation   criminalising   certain   acts   and   conducts   may   encourage   or   even   motivate  offenders  from  abroad  to  move  illegal  activities  to  countries  that  are  devoid  of   a  protective  cybercrime  legislative  framework.           a)   Establishment  of  Common  Interpretations  for  Key  Terms     Legislation  should  properly  define  terms  such  as  “computer”,  “computer  system”,  [vis-­‐à-­‐ vis   “electronic   system”]   “device”,   “system”,   “network”   and   “hinder”   etc.,   using   sufficiently   broad-­‐based   wording   and   where   possible   illustrative   examples.     It   should   clearly   provide   which   terminology   shall   be   left   for   judicial   construction   and   the       P | 15