KINGSTON, Jamaica — Government Senator Kavan Gayle has pointed to the potentially “devastating effects” of cybercrimes on individuals, and has welcomed amendments to the Cybercrimes Act to address the growing problem.

Gayle spoke to the issue on Friday as the Senate debated and passed the Cybercrimes (Amendment) Act 2026 which has far more stringent penalties for persons who breach its provisions, in particular for those who use a computer device for “malicious communication”.

It also speaks to compensation for victims, including those whose intimate images are transmitted and published without their consent, via a computer device.

“The value of strengthening compensation mechanisms lies in recognising the real and often devastating impact cybercrimes have on individuals. These are not abstract or victimless offences. Behind every compromised bank account, stolen identity, or act of online harassment is a person whose financial security, emotional well-being, and sense of safety have been undermined,” said Gayle.

“Ensuring that victims can access adequate compensation is a critical step in restoring dignity, promoting recovery, and reinforcing public confidence in the rule of law. I want to commend the Government for this move of protection,” he added.

A trade unionist by profession, Gayle noted that cybercrime today takes many forms and citizens are increasingly exposed to a wide range of threats.

“These include identity theft, where personal data is unlawfully obtained and used for fraudulent purposes; phishing and online scams, which deceive individuals into disclosing sensitive financial information; unauthorised access to banking systems leading to financial loss; cyber stalking and harassment, which can inflict serious psychological distress; and ransomware attacks, where individuals or businesses are extorted under threat of data loss or exposure.

“Each of these offences carries consequences that extend far beyond immediate financial loss—they can damage reputations, disrupt livelihoods, and cause lasting emotional trauma,” said Gayle.

He told the Senate that in light of these realities, compensation frameworks must be robust and responsive.

“Effective compensation for victims of cybercrime generally includes reimbursement for financial losses, support for costs associated with restoring identity and credit standing, compensation for psychological harm, and in some cases, coverage of legal and recovery expenses. A comprehensive system ensures that victims are not left to bear the burden of crimes committed against them,” he remarked.

He noted that one of the key recommendations of the joint select committee that examined the legislation was the repeal of section 15 of the Cybercrimes Act, to allow for the application of section 24A of the Criminal Justice (Administration) Act. This provides a more expansive and structured approach to compensation for victims.

“By aligning the Cybercrimes Act with a more comprehensive compensation regime, this Government is strengthening protections for victims and enhancing the coherence of our legal system.

“There are clear positives in taking this legislative step. It promotes consistency in how victims of crime are treated, regardless of whether the offence occurs in the physical or digital space. It reduces fragmentation in the law and ensures that victims of cybercrime benefit from the same breadth of remedies available to other victims,” said Gayle.

He noted that it also signals to the public that the State recognises the seriousness of cyber harm and is prepared to respond decisively.

“Moreover, this amendment reinforces accountability. It ensures that offenders are not only subject to criminal sanction but are also held responsible, where appropriate, for compensating those they have harmed. This dual approach—punishment and restitution—is fundamental to a just and balanced legal system”.

Meanwhile, Gayle pointed to data that was shared with the select committee by the Jamaica Cyber Incident Response Team that shows that in 2020 alone, 136 cyber incidents were reported, with the top three categories being abusive content, impersonation, and revenge pornography.

“Notably, over 70 per cent of these matters were referred to the Counter-Terrorism and Organised Crime Investigation Branch, as they were deemed prosecutable. However, a significant concern emerged—many of these cases were not followed through to prosecution, highlighting a gap between reporting, investigation, and judicial outcomes,” said Gayle.

Additionally, he said data provided by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions further underscores this challenge as between 2017 and 2020, the parish courts saw fluctuating but persistent caseloads. In 2017, there were 65 active cases, six inactive and 26 disposed.

In 2018 there were 61 active cases, two were inactive, and 12 were disposed. Across 2019 and 2020, 83 new cases were filed, 103 disposed, and 107 remained pending.

According to Gayle, “these figures point to a system under pressure, where case throughput and resolution timelines require strengthening”.

He also pointed to what he described as a real-world cyber-fraud incident involving a phishing campaign at a financial institution, where fraudsters used deceptive emails and phone calls to obtain customers’ banking credentials and highlighted a concern of lawmakers.

Said Gayle: “While we were assured that existing laws—particularly provisions within the Cybercrimes Act and supporting legislation can address such conduct, we identified a critical weakness: the limited public visibility and reporting of these incidents. Financial institutions often manage these matters internally, which restricts the ability of policymakers and law enforcement to fully assess the scale of cyber-fraud and measure prosecution success rates”.

In response, the committee recommended that financial institutions be required to report, even on an anonymously, the aggregate number of cyber-fraud incidents to the Bank of Jamaica.

“Furthermore, both the Bank of Jamaica and the Financial Services Commission should collect and publish aggregated data, making it accessible to law enforcement and the public. This would significantly enhance transparency, inform policy, and strengthen national response strategies,” stated Gayle.

On the matter of malicious communications online which he described as a growing problem”, Gayle noted that while the right to free expression must always be preserved, “the Committee was clear that there must be a firm boundary where speech becomes harmful, particularly when it threatens an individual’s reputation, livelihood, or safety”.

 — Lynford Simpson