Referenced in: § D. Framework for a
Capacity-building Program
1.
WDR, supra § 1 A, note 10, at 28 et seq.
See also “World Internet Usage and
Population Statistics,” Internet World
Stats, (4 Mar. 2017), at http://www.
internetworldstats.com/stats.htm.
2.
In Uganda, which has 22.6 million mobile
phone numbers, there may be more
mobile phones than lightbulbs. See
Laura Gray, “Does Uganda Have More
Mobile Phones Than Light Bulbs?,” BBC
News, (25 Mar. 2016), at http://www.bbc.
com/news/magazine-35883649. Mobile
phones are frequently used to make
payments in remote rural areas: Across
Africa, more than 25 million active users
are reported to use “M-Pesa” (“M” for
“mobile” and “Pesa” for “money” in
Swahili), a means for making small-value
payments from ordinary mobile. See
“Vodafone M-Pesa Reaches 25 Million
Customers Milestone,” Vodaphone, (25
Apr. 2016), at https://www.vodafone.com/
content/index/media/vodafone-groupreleases/2016/mpesa-25million.html.
See also “M-Pesa Transactions Rise to
Sh15bn Daily after Systems Upgrade,” (8
May 2016), at http://www.nation.co.ke/
news/MPesa-transactions-rise-to-Sh15bnafter-systems-upgrade/1056-3194774llu8yjz/index.html (noting that daily
M-Pesa transactions in Kenya exceed
Sh15bn (~US$145m)); Ignacio Mas & Dan
Radcliffe, “Mobile Payments Go Viral
M-PESA in Kenya,” Capco Journal of
Financial Transformation, Vol. 32 (2011):
169–82.
3.
Cf. §§ 2 A & 2 B, below.
4.
Cf. § 2 E, discussing e-evidence.
5.
See, e.g., CyberCrime@IPA, Article 15
Conditions and Safeguards under the
Budapest Convention on Cybercrime:
Discussion Paper with Contributions
by Henrik Kaspersen (Netherlands),
Joseph Schwerha (USA), Drazen
Dragicevic (Croatia), (Strasbourg:
CoE, 2012) [hereafter, “Article 15
Safeguards”], at https://rm.coe.int/
CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/
isplayDCTMContent?documentId=09000
01680303194#search=cybercrime%20246
7%20safeguards%2029mar12.
6.
Cf. §§ 5 A & 5 B, generally, for a
discussions of safeguards and human
rights issues.
Page 63 | Chapter 1 | End Notes
7.
UN Development Programme (UNDP),
Human Development Report 2001:
Making New Technologies Work for
Human Development, (New York: United
Nations, 2001), at http://hdr.undp.
org/en/content/human-developmentreport-2001. See also WDR, supra § 1 A,
note 10, at 42 et seq.
8.
See WDR, supra § 1 A, note 10, at 222 et
seq.
9.
For instance, in the fight against fraud and
corruption, a “culture of compliance” has
been espoused as a necessary element
in rooting out corruption. See, e.g.,
“Eight Ways to Move Toward a Culture
of Compliance,” Wall Street Journal, (7
Jul. 2013), at http://deloitte.wsj.com/
cfo/2013/06/07/toward-a-culture-ofcompliance-eight-initiatives-ccos-canlead/.
10. For additional resources and examples,
see, e.g., CyberCrime@EaP, Cybercrime
and Cybersecurity Strategies in the
Eastern Partnership Region, (Bucharest:
CoE, 2015), at https://rm.coe.int/
CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/
DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=090
00016803053d2.
11. For references and links to domestic
cybercrime legislation, see appendix 9 C.
12. United States v. Chenault, 844 F.2d 1124,
1131 (5th Cir. 1988).
13. Bettina Weisser, “Cyber Crime—The
Information Society and Related Crimes,”
at, http://www.penal.org/sites/default/
files/files/RM-8.pdf. Cf. computer fraud,
which requires specific intent. USC Title
18 § 1030; fraud and related activity in
connection with computers USC Title 18,
§ 1030(a)(4).
14. For additional resources and examples,
see, e.g., Budapest Convention, supra §
1 B, note 32, at Art. 15; CoE, Explanatory
Report to the Budapest Convention,
(23 Nov. 2001) [hereafter, “Budapest
Explanatory Report”], at https://rm.coe.
int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchSer
vices/DisplayDCTMContent?documen
tId=09000016800cce5b; “Country Profiles
on Cybercrime Legislation,” CoE, at
http://www.coe.int/en/web/cybercrime/
country-profiles; “Data Protection,” CoE,
at http://www.coe.int/en/web/dataprotection/home.
Table of Contents