International Models of Legal Regulation for Combating Cybercrime: Recommendations for Ukraine
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32631/pb.2025.4.05Keywords:
cybercrime, cybersecurity, Budapest Convention, international cooperation, legal regulation, hybrid warfare, cyber defence, Ukraine.Abstract
This article provides a comprehensive analysis of international models of legal regulation for combating cybercrime, identifying their key elements, development trends, and possibilities for implementation in Ukrainian legislation. It reveals universal approaches developed within the Council of Europe and the UN, as well as regional models of the European Union, the United States of America, Asian countries and NATO. Particular attention is paid to the 2001 Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime, its additional protocols and modern mechanisms of international cooperation. It is demonstrated that the Convention has become a fundamental document in the field of unifying legal approaches to the criminalisation of acts related to the use of information technologies and has created a basis for the cross-border exchange of electronic evidence.
The aim of the study is to summarise international experience in combating cybercrime and to develop recommendations for its adaptation in Ukraine. The methodological basis is based on systematic, comparative legal, historical legal and analytical methods, which made it possible to identify patterns in the formation of modern cybersecurity models. Regulatory and legal acts, international treaties, scientific works and practical initiatives of states in the field of cyber defence are analysed.
Ukraine’s participation in international programmes and projects aimed at developing cyber resilience, in particular within the framework of cooperation with the European Union, NATO and the UN, is highlighted. The need to harmonise Ukrainian legislation with international standards, improve procedures for the collection and use of electronic evidence, and strengthen the institutional capacity of law enforcement agencies is substantiated. It is emphasised that after the start of the full-scale invasion by the Russian Federation on 24 February 2022, cybercrime has become one of the key instruments of hybrid warfare against Ukraine.
The scientific novelty lies in identifying the prospects for the development of a national system to combat cybercrime based on international practices. The results obtained are of practical importance for improving legal regulation, strengthening international cooperation, and ensuring the cyber resilience of the state in the face of modern threats. The proposed conclusions can be used to develop a national cybersecurity strategy and improve the effectiveness of interagency cooperation in the field of combating cybercrime.
Downloads
References
1. Bartoli, L. (2024). Cybersecurity and the Fight against Cybercrime: Partners or Competitors? European Journal of Risk Regulation, 16(2), 498–513. https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2025.31.
2. Chiara, P. G. (2024). Towards a right to cybersecurity in EU law? The challenges ahead. Computer Law & Security Review, 53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2024.105961.
3. Hakmeh, J. (2024). The UN convention on cybercrime: a milestone in cybercrime cooperation? Journal of Cyber Policy, 9(2), 125–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/23738871.2024.2441549.
4. Juszczak, A., & Sason, E. (2023). The use of electronic evidence in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice: An introduction to the new EU package on e-evidence. EUCRIM, 2, 182–200. https://doi.org/10.30709/eucrim-2023-014.
5. Kuczyńska, H. (2024). The EU E-evidence Package from the Polish Perspective: High Time for a Systemic Change. Studia Iuridica Lublinensia, 33(5), 9–28. https://doi.org/10.17951/sil.2024.33.5.125-153.
6. Punda, О., Vavrynchuk, M., Kohut, O., Kravchuk, S., & Prysiazhniuk, M. (2023). The Legal Status and Capabilities of Cyber Police in Ukraine: The Reasons for the Existence of Frauds with the Use of IT Technologies. Pakistan Journal of Criminology, 15(2), 85–97.
7. Ristvej, J., Tonhauser, M., Chovanec, D., Kubás, J., Kollár, B., & Zamiar, Z. (2025). Cyber resilience conceptual model for the European Union NIS2 standards implementation in Slovakia. Scientific Reports, 15. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-12829-3.
8. Romaniuk, V. V., & Ablamskyi, S. Ye. (2024). Criteria for the admissibility of digital (electronic) evidence in criminal proceedings. Law and Safety, 2(93), 140–150. https://doi.org/10.32631/pb.2024.2.13.
9. Sachoulidou, A. (2024). Cross-border access to electronic evidence in criminal matters: The new EU legislation and the consolidation of a paradigm shift in the area of “judicial” cooperation. New Journal of European Criminal Law, 15(3), 256–274. https://doi.org/10.1177/20322844241258649.
10. Schmitz-Berndt, S. (2023). Defining the reporting threshold for a cybersecurity incident under the NIS Directive and the NIS 2 Directive. Journal of Cybersecurity, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1093/cybsec/tyad009.
11. Snail ka Mtuze, S., & Musoni, M. (2023). An overview of cybercrime law in South Africa. International Cybersecurity Law Review, 4, 299–232. https://doi.org/10.1365/s43439-023-00089-8.
12. Spiezia, F. (2022). International cooperation and protection of victims in cyberspace: welcoming Protocol II to the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime. ERA Forum, 23, 101–108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-022-00707-8.
13. Tosza, S. (2024). Electronic Evidence after E-evidence Package’s Adoption: Challenges for Application and Unresolved Problems. Studia Iuridica Lublinensia, 33(5), 237–252. https://doi.org/10.17951/sil.2024.33.5.237-260.
14. Tropina, T. (2024). “This is not a human rights convention!”: The perils of overlooking human rights in the UN cybercrime treaty. Journal of Cyber Policy, 9(2), 200–220. https://doi.org/10.1080/23738871.2024.2419517.
15. Vandezande, N. (2024). Cybersecurity in the EU: How the NIS2 – directive stacks up against its predecessor. Computer Law & Security Review, 52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2023.105890.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 M. V. Mordvyntsev, D. V. Pashniev, O. V. Khliestkov
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
