According to Article 11 of the Anti-Cybercrime Law: “The competent court may exempt from these penalties any perpetrator who takes the initiative to report the crime to the competent authority before learning of it and before the harm occurs. If the report was made after learning of the crime, the exemption stipulates that the report shall arrest the remaining perpetrators in the event of their multiplicity, or the tools used in the crime.”

  • The whistleblower must be one of the perpetrators participating in committing the cybercrime; The article regulates the exemption of the perpetrator, not the reward of the non-participating person who reports the crime.
  • If the report was made before the competent authority became aware of the crime:
    Two conditions must be met:
    • The perpetrator must take the initiative to report.
    • The report must be filed before the authority becomes aware of the crime and before the damage occurs.
  • If the report was made after the competent authority became aware of the crime:
    It is not enough to simply report; the report must lead to one of two things:
    • Arresting the remaining perpetrators, if the crime was committed by more than one person; or
    • Seizing the tools used in the crime.
  • The exemption is permissible for the competent court and is not an automatic right.
  • The text used the phrase “the competent court has the right to exempt”; Therefore, exemption does not result once the report is submitted, even if it meets the aforementioned conditions, except by a court decision.

For law and legal consultations..Contact the office of lawyer Abdul Majeed Al Rashid.

References

  • Article Eleven of the Anti-Cybercrime Law

No comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *