In
an over ambitious move, the US Supreme Court has expanded
the applicability of Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of
Criminal Procedure to not only US citizens but also those living in
other countries.
When even limiting the
applicability of the Rule 41 to entire US jurisdiction is
troublematic it is too much to expect that other countries would take
it in a friendly manner when their sovereignty is violated. For
instance, if a warrant issued by a judge allows the FBI to
investigate a matter in China, will China take it in a friendly
manner?
Similarly, if the FBI
hacks into a computer system located in India, will Indian government
accept such an approach? It seems the US Supreme Court was carried
away while protecting the interests of law enforcement agencies of US
rather than the actual victims. Indian Supreme Court has also
committed a mistake in the past regarding limiting
the cyber law due diligence in India. We need a stronger
cyber law due diligence and not a weaker one.
It is good to hear that
Supreme Courts of US and India are trying to adopt technology and
accordingly are modifying the laws of US and India. But their actual
impact and constitutional effects must also be kept in mind.
The approach of the US
Supreme Court would only result in an increased use of state
sponsored cyber attacks that is already on rise. Intelligence
agencies around the world are asking for legal immunity against cyber deterrent acts. India is also following this path
and this approach of US Supreme Court would only complicate the
matter further.
Conflict
of laws in cyberspace are further going to increase due to
this self centered approach of various nations. This is more so when
there is no uniformity regarding international
legal issues of cyber attacks and cyber security as on
date.
