No abstract

No abstract

This article explores the challenges of digital constitutionalism in practice through a case study examining how concepts of privacy and security have been framed and contested in Australian cyber security and telecommunications policy-making over the last decade. The Australian Government has formally committed to 'Internet freedom' norms, including privacy, through membership of the Freedom Online Coalition. Importantly, however, this commitment is non-binding and designed primarily to guide the development of policy by legislators and the executive government. Through this analysis, we seek to understand if, and how, principles of digital constitutionalism have been incorporated at the national level. Our analysis suggests a fundamental challenge for the project of digital constitutionalism in developing and implementing principles that have practical or legally binding impact on domestic telecommunications and cyber security policy. Australia is the only major Western liberal democracy without constitutional human rights or a legislated bill of rights at the federal level; this means that the task of 'balancing' what are conceived as competing rights is left only to the legislature. Our analysis shows that despite high-level commitments to privacy as per the Freedom of Online Coalition, individual rights are routinely discounted against collective rights to security. We conclude by arguing that, at least in Australia, the domestic conditions limit the practical application and enforcement of digital constitutionalism's norms.

This article explores the challenges of digital constitutionalism in practice through a case study examining how concepts of privacy and security have been framed and contested in Australian cyber security and telecommunications policy-making over the last decade. The Australian Government has formally committed to 'Internet freedom' norms, including privacy, through membership of the Freedom Online Coalition. Importantly, however, this commitment is non-binding and designed primarily to guide the development of policy by legislators and the executive government. Through this analysis, we seek to understand if, and how, principles of digital constitutionalism have been incorporated at the national level. Our analysis suggests a fundamental challenge for the project of digital constitutionalism in developing and implementing principles that have practical or legally binding impact on domestic telecommunications and cyber security policy. Australia is the only major Western liberal democracy without constitutional human rights or a legislated bill of rights at the federal level; this means that the task of 'balancing' what are conceived as competing rights is left only to the legislature. Our analysis shows that despite high-level commitments to privacy as per the Freedom of Online Coalition, individual rights are routinely discounted against collective rights to security. We conclude by arguing that, at least in Australia, the domestic conditions limit the practical application and enforcement of digital constitutionalism's norms.

The rapid growth in the availability of information and communications technologies has also expanded opportunities to commit cybercrime. Law enforcement officers are often the first responders to such incidents. Internationally, research has revealed how police preparedness to respond to cybercrime is mediated by organizational policies and procedures, as well as characteristics such as education, gender, and previous training for cybercrime investigations. However, there has been limited research in an Australian context examining police preparedness to respond to cybercrime. As such, this article examines the preparedness of Australian police personnel to respond to cybercrime incidents drawing on surveys with two state-wide police agencies ( n = 422). Here, we examine the prevalence of cybercrime training across both agencies, levels of individual and organizational confidence about responding to cybercrime incidents, and their views about enhancing responses to cybercrime. The results suggest only half of the surveyed personnel have received some cybercrime-related training, with significantly less reporting specific instruction about how to receive and direct incident reports and manage digital crime scenes. Further, while personnel are modestly confident in their individual capabilities to respond to cybercrime incidents, they lack comparative confidence in their organizations and yearn for more resourcing and professional development. Implications for police resourcing, training, and practices are discussed.