Over 60 United Nations member states signed the first global treaty addressing cybercrime in Hanoi on Saturday, marking a major step in international efforts to combat digital offenses. The agreement, however, has faced criticism from rights organizations and technology firms who argue that its vague language could enable intrusive surveillance and suppress freedom of expression.
The treaty, officially titled the UN Convention Against Cybercrime, aims to improve international cooperation in combating digital offenses ranging from child exploitation and money laundering to cross-border online scams. Once ratified by the signatory nations, the convention will come into force as a new global legal framework for digital crime prevention. UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres hailed the signing as an “important milestone,” adding that the world must unite to confront increasingly sophisticated cyberattacks that disrupt lives and economies. The convention, first proposed by Russian diplomats in 2017 and approved last year after extended negotiations, is expected to shape how countries collaborate on cyber investigations and data sharing.
Despite its intended goals, the treaty has stirred concerns among rights advocates and cybersecurity experts who fear it could legitimize overreach by state authorities. Critics warn that the agreement’s broad provisions may compel companies to disclose user data without sufficient privacy safeguards, potentially leading to misuse in authoritarian regimes. Sabhanaz Rashid Diya, founder of the Tech Global Institute, highlighted that such requirements could “rubber-stamp problematic practices” already used to target journalists and dissidents. While Vietnam’s government confirmed the participation of over 60 nations, it did not specify the full list of signatories. Observers expect both democratic and non-democratic states, including Russia and China, to be among them.
The treaty’s supporters argue that growing cybercrime networks—especially large-scale scams proliferating across Southeast Asia—demand stronger international cooperation. However, Diya noted that while democratic countries might view the convention as a “compromise document” that includes limited human rights protections, these provisions remain insufficient. More than a dozen global rights groups have jointly criticized the treaty, calling its safeguards for privacy and free expression “weak.”
Major technology firms have also expressed strong reservations. The Cybersecurity Tech Accord, a coalition representing over 160 companies including Meta, Dell, and Infosys, opted not to attend the signing ceremony. The group’s head, Nick Ashton-Hart, warned that the convention’s wording could criminalize legitimate cybersecurity research and allow states to collaborate on prosecuting virtually any offense they deem fit. Such powers, he said, risk undermining corporate and individual data protections worldwide. Ashton-Hart pointed to the existing Budapest Convention on Cybercrime as a more balanced framework, one that emphasizes respect for human rights and privacy.
Human Rights Watch’s Deborah Brown criticized the choice of Vietnam as the signing venue, citing the country’s history of suppressing dissent and online expression. She argued that Russia, a key architect of the treaty, stands to benefit most politically, despite being a major source of global cybercrime activity. “This treaty cannot compensate for Russia’s lack of political will to address cybercrime within its own borders,” Brown said, underscoring the skepticism surrounding the treaty’s long-term impact.
The signing of the UN cybercrime treaty underscores both the urgency and complexity of regulating cyberspace. While many nations see it as a necessary step toward coordinated digital governance, others remain wary of its potential to erode individual rights in the name of global security.
Follow the SPIN IDG WhatsApp Channel for updates across the Smart Pakistan Insights Network covering all of Pakistan’s technology ecosystem.
