You are here

Convention on Cyber Crime

Survey Answer:

Racist and xenophobic motivated threat (Art 4 of the Additional Protocol)
The threatening, through a computer system, with the commission of a serious criminal offence as defined nationally, of persons or a group of persons for the reason that they belong to a group, distinguished by eg colour, ethnic origin or religion, if used as a pretext for any of these factors.

Article 9 – Offences related to child pornography
The producing, making available or procuring of child pornography through a computer system or the possessing of child pornography on a computer system or data storage medium.
States may make reservations as to the sanctioning of the procuring and possession of child pornography. Furthermore they may choose to lower the age limit of minors to up to 16 years, thus narrowing the applicability of this provision, and whether or not to consider realistic images or content with persons appearing to be a minor as “child pornography”.

Offences related to infringements of copyright and related rights (Art 10)
The wilful infringement of copyright or related rights on a commercial scale and by means of a computer system.
States choose not to adopt this provision, provided that other effective remedies are available.

Dissemination of racist and xenophobic material through computer systems (Art 3 of the Additional Protocol)
The making available of racist and xenophobic material to the public through a computer system.
Provided that other effective remedies are available, states may choose not to sanction the dissemination of material that is not associated with hatred or violence.
Where such expressions are however protected as freedom of speech under national law, states may choose not to apply Art 3 at all.

Racist and xenophobic motivated insult (Art 5 of the Additional Protocol)
The public insulting, through a computer system, of persons or groups of persons for the reason that they belong to a group, distinguished by eg colour, ethnic origin or religion, if used as a pretext for any of these factors.
States may either require that, due to the insult, the (group of) persons are exposed to hatred, contempt or ridicule or chose not to transpose this provision.

Denial, gross minimisation, approval or justification of genocide or crimes against hu-manity (Art 6)
The making available through a computer system material which denies, grossly minimises, approves or justifies acts constituting genocide or crimes against humanity.
States may additionally require the act to be committed with the intent to incite hatred, discrimination or violence against individuals or groups of individuals, by eg colour, ethnic origin or religion if used as a pretext for any of these factors. Furthermore they are free to choose not to adapt this provision at all.

Provided By:
Árpád Geréd, Maybach Görg Lenneis Geréd Rechtsanwälte