Open Access
Enow Godwill Baiye
- Ph.D, English Private Law, University of Dschang, Cameroon, Central Africa
Abstract
This article is centered on spams and the violation of the right to privacy under Cameroonian electronic laws. The results of this work shows that spams have undoubtedly become a major source of violation of the right to privacy in Cameroon. This is attributed firstly, to the general and sparsely nature of the laws in this domain. Secondly, the lukewarm attitudes of electronic communication users who careless about such messages, gives spammers the opportunity to constantly send such messages with no fear of been punished by the law. From our findings, it was recommended that the 2010 cyber law that has existed for 12 years should be revised as it sparely addressed the issue of spam. Also, more resources should be put at the disposal of ANTIC to enable them combat this digital evil. Electronic communication users should take the bull by the horn by enforcing their rights against spammers.
Keywords: Spam, spammers, privacy, users, cybercrimes, electronic communication
[This article belongs to National Journal of Cyber Security Law(njcsl)]
Browse Figures
References
1. Neumann, P., and Weinstein, L., (1997), “”Inside Risks: Spam, Spam, Spam! ,”” Communications of the ACM, Vol. 40(6), P. 112.
2. Cybercrimes as defined within the ambit of section 4 (32) of the 2010 law are: infraction of the law carried out through cyberspace using means other than those habitually used to commit conventional crimes.
3. Business in Cameroon, (2022) Stratline Limited.
4. Cyber security: spam, scams, frauds and Identity theft. Available at https://mediasmarts.ca/digital-media-literacy/ digital-issues/cyber-security/ cyber-security- spam- scams-Frauds-Identity theft. (Lastly Accessed on the 17th of August, 2022).
5. Cournane, A., and Hunt, R., (2004), “”An Analysis of the Tools used for the Generation and Prevention of Spam,”” Computers & Security, Vol. 23(2), P. 154.
6. Andreas Jacobsson, (2008), Privacy and Security in Internet-Based Information Systems, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Printfabriken, Karlskrona, Sweden, P.52.
7. Stone, E.F., Gardner, D.G., Gueutal, H.G., & McClure, S., (1983), “”A Field Experiment Comparing Information-Privacy Values, Beliefs, and Attitudes Across Several Types of Organizations,”” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 68(3), P. 459.
8. Article 12 of the 1948 UDHR. Strongly rebukes anyone who arbitrarily interferes with another’s privacy, family home or correspondence.
9. Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Act.
10. Article 14 of the International Convention on the Protection of Migrant Workers and Members of their Families.
11. Article 3 of CEMAC Directive N0. 07/08-UEAC-133-CM-18 laying down the Legal Framework for the Protection of the Rights of Users of the Electronic Communication in the CEMAC Region.
12. The preamble of the Cameroonian Constitution affirms that the privacy of all correspondence is inviolate. No interference may be allowed except by virtue of decisions coming from the judicial power
13. Section 1 & 41 of Law N° 2010/012 of 21 December 2010 relating to Cybersecurity and Cyber Criminality in Cameroon.
14. Ibid, Section 4(26).
15. Ibid, Section 4(24) provides that there shall be maintenance of the confidentiality of information and transactions to prevent unauthorized disclosure of information to non-recipients enabling the reading, listening, intentional or accidental, illegal copying during storage, processing or transfer.
16. Ibid, Section 43.
17. Ibid, Section 48(1)(2).
18. Decree No. 2013/0399/PM of 27 February, 2013 on the Modalities of the Consumers’ Protection in the Electronic Communication Sector.
19. Section 74(1) of the 2010 Law on Cybersecurity and Cyber Criminality punishes persons with imprisonment from 1 to 2 years and a fine from 1,000,000 to 5,000,000 CFA francs who uses any device to receive the privacy of another person by attaching, recording or transmitting private or confidential electronic data without the consent of the persons
20. With imprisonment from 6 months to 2 years or a fine from 1 000,000 to 5,000,000 CFA francs or both of such fine and imprisonment.
21. Ibid, Section 41.
22. Ibid, Section 64(4).
23. Article 4 of Decree no 2012/180 of 12 April 2012 on the organisation and functioning of ANTIC
24. Ibid, Article 5; Other specific functions are: to identify software and computer equipment that will be relevant for public service needs; contribute in the harmonization of technical standards as well as proposing technical repositories, to promote interoperability between information system; coordinate the implementation and monitoring of websites ,intranet and extranet of the state and public bodes; contribute to the technical training to train universities, colleges, high schools colleges; to put in place measures to ensure internet security amongst others.
25. Ibid, Article 7.
26. Skoudis (2004), Malware- Fighting Malicious Code, Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
27. Andreas Jacobsson, (2008), Privacy and Security in Internet-Based Information Systems, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Printfabriken, Karlskrona, Sweden, P.58.
28. National Agency of Information and Communication Technologies.
29. Ngaundje D., Leno, (2021), “An Appraisal of the Law on Consumer Protection in Cameroon with Respect to Technology Products’’, International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), Vol. 10 (2), PP. 828-835.
National Journal of Cyber Security Law
| Volume | 5 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Received | August 17, 2022 |
| Accepted | August 29, 2022 |
| Published | January 29, 2023 |