Include public interest exception in Cybercrime Bill

THE AMERICAN Chamber of Commerce TT (Amcham) has called for a public interest exception to be included in the Cybercrime Bill, echoing a call by the Media Association of TT (MATT).

The suggestion was made as Amcham CEO Nirad Tewarie and research officer Aurelia Bruce sat before the Joint Select Committee (JSC) on the Cybercrime Bill in Parliament yesterday.

“We share the views expressed previously that there should be a public interest exception. So that public interest exception...is not just for the media, it is for anyone.”

“We do not believe that the people involved in bringing this (information in the public interest) to light should be subject to prosecution.”

JSC chairman Faris Al-Rawi asked Tewarie to qualify the public interest exception including the treatment of hackers.

Tewarie responded, nobody encourages hacking for hacking sake and as a former MATT secretary he was aware of the conceptual issues.

“Sometimes public and private officials who are engaged in acts in which they should not be engaged, seek to hide that and if someone were to access the information in a manner that would then allow the public to have access to the information and remedy a situation where the public’s interest was subverted, then it is reasonable to assert that those people are doing a good and therefore should not be penalised for doing a public good.”

He said there was also concern about the potential of the bill to limit freedom of expression and to cause self-censorship.

Tewarie said the fines and penalties should be sufficient to deter cybercrimes, but not so minimal that it could be passed off and the cost borne in the commission of a crime for commercial benefit.

He said the lowest fine was $100,000 but this was very low regarding transnational crime and suggested an increase.

Later the JSC met with Police Service members and Al-Rawi asked about the public interest argument exception.

Acting Asst Supt Organised Crime Intelligence Unit Kerwin Francis said the issue of public interest and the fine balancing act suggested by the media fraternity should be dealt with in the courts.