The US refuses to sign UN’s cybercrime treaty

The United States declined to sign the United Nations’ Convention against Cybercrime in Hanoi this weekend, stating that it continues to review the treaty.

Last weekend, 72 countries signed the UN Convention against Cybercrime treaty, which aims to prevent and combat cybercrime across the globe. In addition, its goal is to strengthen international cooperation in sharing digital evidence originating from electronic devices and criminalizing cyber-related offenses.

“The UN Cybercrime Convention is a powerful, legally binding instrument to strengthen our collective defenses against cybercrime. It is a testament to the continued power of multilateralism to deliver solutions. And it is a vow that no country, no matter its level of development, will be left defenseless against cybercrime,” UN Secretary-General António Guterres noted at the signing ceremony.

UNODC Executive Director Ghada Waly called the treaty “a vital tool to fight back” against cybercrime.

“Now we must ensure the Convention’s swift entry into force and implementation, for a safer digital world for all,” she added.

Many countries signed the UN Convention against Cybercrime this weekend, including the United Kingdom, the EU, Brazil, China, and Russia. The United States, however, did not sign the treaty.

“The United States continues to review the treaty,” a State Department spokesperson told Recorded Future News in a brief statement. He didn’t or couldn’t elaborate further on the matter.

The UN Convention against Cybercrime has been under scrutiny by numerous human rights groups. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) urged nations not to sign the treaty as it lacks human rights safeguards.

“The UN cybercrime convention, as currently written, risks enabling states to leverage its expansive cross-border data-access and cooperation mechanisms to obtain such information for political surveillance, abusing the Convention’s mechanisms to monitor critics, pressure their families, and target marginalized communities abroad,” the human rights interest group said in a blog post.

Curious what others think about this story? Contribute your thoughts to the debate below.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) argued that the treaty goes far beyond addressing cybercrime.

“It obligates states to establish broad electronic surveillance powers to investigate and cooperate on a wide range of crimes, including those that don’t involve information and communication systems. It does so without adequate human rights safeguards,” the advocacy group claimed.

Unlock more exclusive Cybernews content on YouTube.