I think it speaks well for Guyana’s recognition that the convergence of computing and communications and the exponential growth of digital technology (cyberspace) although bringing enormous benefits also carry great risks as evidenced by the enhanced capacity of individual offenders and criminal networks to exploit new vulnerabilities exposed in the relatively new concept of cyber crime.  Therefore, the recently conducted workshop on cyber-crime hosted by the Ministry of Home Affairs should be seen as a commendable government initiative. It is no secret that in many jurisdictions the response by law enforcement agencies to cyber crime has been largely ineffective in confronting even the less than sophisticated criminal operations. Gross (2003) admits that one of the extreme risks cyber-criminals pose is when they operate in the context of failed or failing states thus contributing to the criminalisation of the world economy, by providing safe havens for plundered resources.
In support of the elements of the framework (which is a work-in-progress) emerging from the workshop, controlling cyber-crime also requires networks between police and other agencies within government, networks between police and private institutions, and networks of police across national borders.  Many cyber-crimes take place across jurisdictional boundaries and through various jurisdictions therefore the need for reliable and efficient mechanisms for international cooperation in law enforcement has never been more urgent because as Esposito, (2004) states “The fight against cyber-crime either is a global one or it makes no sense.”
Among the several challenges that forensic specialists investigating computer-related crime have faced over time and which are constantly evolving are those from release of malicious software to code designed to steal information, especially personal identification data.  With government, industries, markets and consumers increasingly dependent on computer connectivity, they are prone to an array of threats.  Moore (2003); Staniford (2002) et al argue that the risks now posed by the release of malicious codes of increasing complexity targeted against either a significant commercial or government site could threaten the viability of e-commerce.  Thus the greater use of encryption and access protection will offer some measure of protection against the extracting of evidence from computers and servers.  The reluctance of victims to report offences and the fact that many victims are unaware their systems have been compromised add to the already complex challenges facing the investigator and those responsible for information technology infrastructure protection which, if non-existent or minimal, provides opportunities for unauthorized computer intrusion leading to criminal activity such as extortion, financial or internet fraud, identity theft, telecommunications theft, and economic espionage.  The recently held forum on terrorism in Guyana would have examined the potential for cyber-terrorism as a major strategic issue in the prevention of terrorism.  This potential may have also necessitated the proposed intrusive methods of monitoring which may raise genuine concerns about perceived or real threats to individual privacy.
The tasks of identifying cyber-criminals and bringing them to justice pose formidable challenges to law enforcement agencies across the globe, and require a degree and timeliness of cooperation particularly when one looks at the compatibility of criminal activity with global changes as demonstrated by the expansion and convergence of the profitable business of trafficking in persons, pornography, narcotics or other illicit commodities with the development of communication infrastructure and trade.  Forensic computing and evidence preservation protocols are essential to effective investigation and prosecution; especially given the trans-border nature of global law enforcement of cyber-crime evidence collection.  In most cases, it is unlikely that a computer expert will be available at the crime scene and the risks of contaminating the evidence are high.  It means therefore that as with other types of crime, the emphasis should be on following the traditional chain-of-evidence rules and ensuring that the relevant expertise is promptly assigned to the task. I believe that some or all of the above formed the basis for workshop discussions and I would like to publicly congratulate the government for a timely intervention.