Criminal justice on the Internet – identifying common solutions – WS 4 2017: Difference between revisions

From EuroDIG Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 43: Line 43:
SMEs are responsible for the clustering of submissions into a thematic category they have an expertise in. They define subtopics and identify submissions which fall under this subtopic. The aim is to verify submissions which can be merged in one session. In the course of the session organising process SMEs will serve as a mentor for the respective category by supporting all Focal Points.
SMEs are responsible for the clustering of submissions into a thematic category they have an expertise in. They define subtopics and identify submissions which fall under this subtopic. The aim is to verify submissions which can be merged in one session. In the course of the session organising process SMEs will serve as a mentor for the respective category by supporting all Focal Points.
*'''Key Participants (for workshop) or Panellists (for plenary)'''
*'''Key Participants (for workshop) or Panellists (for plenary)'''
'''Until 15 May 2017.''' Key Participants (workshop) are experts willing to provide their knowledge during a session – not necessarily on stage. Key Participants should contribute to the session planning process and keep statements short and punchy during the session. Panellist (plenary) will be selected and assigned by the org team, ensuring a stakeholder balanced dialogue also considering gender and geographical balance. Panellists should contribute to the session planning process and keep statements short and punchy during the session.
 
Please provide short CV’s of the Key Participants involved in your session at the Wiki or link to another source.
- Gregory Mounier, Head of Outreach at European Cybercrime Centre (EC3), Europol
 
- Catrin Bauer-Bulst, Deputy Head of Unit, DG HOME, European Commission
 
- Konstantinos Komaitis, ISOC
 
- Private sector
 
*'''Moderator'''
*'''Moderator'''
'''Until 15 May 2017.'''
 
The moderator is the facilitator of the session at the event. Moderators are responsible for including the audience and encouraging a lively interaction among all session attendants. Please make sure the moderator takes a neutral role and can balance between all speakers.
- Richard Leaning, RIPE NCC
Please provide short CV of the moderator of your session at the Wiki or link to another source.
 
- Christian Borggreen, Director, CCIA Europe
 
*'''Remote Moderator'''
*'''Remote Moderator'''
'''Until 15 May 2017.'''
 
The Remote Moderator is in charge of facilitating participation via digital channels such as WebEx and social medial (Twitter, facebook). Remote Moderators monitor and moderate the social media channels and the participants via WebEX and forward questions to the session moderator.
Fotjon Kosta, ‎Head of ICT at Ministry of Energy and Industry, Albania
Please contact the [mailto:office@eurodig.org EuroDIG secretariat] if you need help to find a remote moderator.
 
*'''Organising Team (Org Team)'''  
*'''Organising Team (Org Team)'''  
'''As they sign up''' The Org Team is a group of people shaping the session. Org Teams are open and every interested individual can become a member.
'''As they sign up''' The Org Team is a group of people shaping the session. Org Teams are open and every interested individual can become a member.
*'''Reporter'''
*'''Reporter'''
'''Until 15 May 2017.''' The Reporter takes notes during the session and formulates 3 (max. 5) bullet points at the end of each session that:  
 
Tatiana Tropina, Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law
 
The Reporter takes notes during the session and formulates 3 (max. 5) bullet points at the end of each session that:  
*are summarised on a slide and  presented to the audience at the end of each session  
*are summarised on a slide and  presented to the audience at the end of each session  
*relate to the particular session and to European Internet governance policy
*relate to the particular session and to European Internet governance policy
Line 62: Line 75:
*are in (rough) consensus with the audience
*are in (rough) consensus with the audience
*are to be submitted to the secretariat within 48 hours after the session took place
*are to be submitted to the secretariat within 48 hours after the session took place
Please provide short CV of the reporter of your session at the Wiki or link to another source and contact the [mailto:office@eurodig.org EuroDIG secretariat] if you need help to find a reporter.


== Current discussion, conference calls, schedules and minutes ==
== Current discussion, conference calls, schedules and minutes ==

Revision as of 19:53, 14 May 2017

Programme overview 2017

WS 4: Crime and criminal justice Consolidated programme 2018 overview

To follow the current discussion on this topic, see the discussion tab on the upper left side of this page


Final title of the session: Please send the final title until latest to wiki@eurodig.org. Do not edit the title of the page at the wiki on your own. The link to your session may otherwise disappear.

Session teaser

Digital investigations are not all about cybercrime or internet enabled crime anymore. Almost every real life criminal act from shoplifting, robbery, car theft leave digital traces. Law enforcement has short arms: collecting electronic evidence is getting increasingly complex in a cross-border environment with many unregulated intermediaries. Criminal justice in cyberspace depends on the development of working solutions to the problem of digital evidence collection, but different stakeholders are still struggling not only to find those solutions, but even to speak the same language.

During this session we will bring together various stakeholders: law enforcement, legislators, civil society and private sector to discuss possible solutions to the challenge of criminal justice in cyberspace. Our goal is make us walking in each others' shoes and understand each other's concerns. Join us and contribute to the discussion!

Keywords

cybercrime, digital investigations, law enforcement, digital evidence, electronic evidence, criminal justice

Session description

When it comes to the Internet, law enforcement is not operating in a lawless land. However, digital investigations are problematic because of the patchwork of national laws, slow mutual legal assistance system and the need to cooperate with intermediaries located in foreign jurisdictions. Furthermore, criminal procedural law is subject of strict safeguards and must always respect human rights. What are the legal and ad-hoc solutions for solving the problem of obtaining digital evidence? How do law enforcement cooperate - and would like to do so in the future - with both regulated and non-regulated intermediaries? What can we do to improve this cooperation? Are there any good practices? The session will discuss some of the problems, particular existing solutions and the way to improve the cooperation between law enforcement and other stakeholders without compromising on human rights and safeguards. The issues to be discussed, among others are:

- Practical solutions to existing challenges. e.g. Carrier-grade NATs issue.

- Clear frameworks for cooperation between intermediaries and law enforcement.

- Current and future solutions for jurisdictional problems in obtaining digital evidence.

- Human rights and safeguarding privacy.

Format

All the participants to engage in the discussion. The panellists invited to the workshop are the resource persons for the discussion, and the co-moderators will ensure that the workshop is interactive with everyone contributing. The main goal of this session is to ensure that stakeholders are aware of each other’s problems and are ready to discuss and work towards a common solution.

The moderators will open the floor for everyone’s questions and comments during the whole session making sure the discussion remain on the topic.

Further reading

Until 30 April 2017. Links to relevant websites, declarations, books, documents. Please note we cannot offer web space, so only links to external resources are possible. Example for an external link: Main page of EuroDIG

People

Please provide name and institution for all people you list here.

  • Focal Point: Richard Leaning, RIPE NCC

Focal Points take over the responsibility and lead of the session organisation. Focal Points are kindly requested to observe EuroDIG's session principles. Focal Points work in close cooperation with the respective Subject Matter Expert (SME) and the EuroDIG Secretariat.

  • Subject Matter Expert (SME): Tatiana Tropina (Max Planck Institute)

SMEs are responsible for the clustering of submissions into a thematic category they have an expertise in. They define subtopics and identify submissions which fall under this subtopic. The aim is to verify submissions which can be merged in one session. In the course of the session organising process SMEs will serve as a mentor for the respective category by supporting all Focal Points.

  • Key Participants (for workshop) or Panellists (for plenary)

- Gregory Mounier, Head of Outreach at European Cybercrime Centre (EC3), Europol

- Catrin Bauer-Bulst, Deputy Head of Unit, DG HOME, European Commission

- Konstantinos Komaitis, ISOC

- Private sector

  • Moderator

- Richard Leaning, RIPE NCC

- Christian Borggreen, Director, CCIA Europe

  • Remote Moderator

Fotjon Kosta, ‎Head of ICT at Ministry of Energy and Industry, Albania

  • Organising Team (Org Team)

As they sign up The Org Team is a group of people shaping the session. Org Teams are open and every interested individual can become a member.

  • Reporter

Tatiana Tropina, Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law

The Reporter takes notes during the session and formulates 3 (max. 5) bullet points at the end of each session that:

  • are summarised on a slide and presented to the audience at the end of each session
  • relate to the particular session and to European Internet governance policy
  • are forward looking and propose goals and activities that can be initiated after EuroDIG (recommendations)
  • are in (rough) consensus with the audience
  • are to be submitted to the secretariat within 48 hours after the session took place

Current discussion, conference calls, schedules and minutes

See the discussion tab on the upper left side of this page. Please use this page to publish:

  • dates for virtual meetings or coordination calls
  • short summary of calls or email exchange

Please be as open and transparent as possible in order to allow others to get involved and contact you. Use the wiki not only as the place to publish results but also to summarize the discussion process.

Contact

Get in contact with the Org Team by sending an email.

Video record

Will be provided here after the event.

Transcript

Will be provided here after the event.

Messages

Please provide a short summary from the outcome of your session. Bullet points are fine.