Abstract
The evolution of the Internet amidst a rapidly growing global economy has created a completely new environment in which traditional crime prospers. Equally the convergence of computing and communication has changed the way we live, communicate and commit crime. Cybercriminals in Nigeria commonly known as ‘419 scammers’; a word coined from the Nigerian criminal code that penalises people from obtaining money under false pretence cost the Nigerian consumer $13.5 billion dollars in losses in 2012 (Clarke in European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research 10: 55–63, 2004; Sesan et al. in Economic Cost of Cybercrime in Nigeria, 2013; Grabosky in Social and Legal Studies 10: 243–249, 2001). Previous studies have focused on the causes and effects of cybercrime in Nigeria (Hassan et al. in ARPN Journal of Science and Technology 2: 626–631, 2012; Adesina in Canadian Social Science 13: 19–29, 2017); laws penalising against misuse of computer (Olusola et al. in The International Journal of Engineering and Science 2: 19–25, 2013; Saulawa and Abubakar in Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization 32: 23–33, 2014) and have focused relatively on financial cost and socio-economic effects of cybercrime (WITFOR in Social, Ethical and Legal Aspects, 2005; Sesan et al. 2012). Even though some studies have tried to explore cybercrime from the perspective of law enforcement Agencies in the UAE and Jordan (Maghaireh in Jordanian Cybercrime Investigations: A Comparative Analysis of Search for and Seizure of Digital Evidence, 2009; Alkaabi in Combating Computer Crime: An International Perspective, 2010), none has been done holistically from the view of law enforcement and members of the Cybercrime Advisory Council in Nigeria. Adopting a classical criminological framework of Routine Activity Theory (RAT), this research examined particularly cyber-enabled crime of advance fee fraud in Nigeria within the scope RAT which argued that for crime to take place, three requirements must be present namely; a motivated offender, a suitable target and an absence of a capable guardian. The research examined the factors that motivate an offender and what elements make a target (i.e. victim or computer) suitable for a crime. In the process, it considers the suitability of law enforcement officers and some members of the Cybercrime Advisory Council (CAC) as capable guardians and what factors limits their capabilities in mitigating the activities of cyber criminals. The research has been framed on an interpretivist paradigm and relativist philosophical stand, with focus on an inductive qualitative approach involving semi-structured interviews and documentation. These involved policy makers, members of parliament, telecommunications and ICT regulators on one hand; and investigators, prosecutors, forensic analyst and media practitioners particularly from the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), which is a leading law enforcement agency in the fight against cybercrime. The multi-dimensional evidence explains the role played by each of the stakeholders, the measures and partnership deployed in tackling cybercrime, and the challenges and recommendations needed in the international effort to tackle cybercrime globally. Findings suggest that the proliferation and lack of effective policing of the internet enabled by the greed of individuals and lack of enforcement and collaboration of relevant stakeholders have led to financial losses to victims. The findings further show how lack of proper education and awareness of individuals, and adequate training and provision of tools for law enforcement officers contributes to the high prevalence of cybercrime in Nigeria. Evidence is provided that documents the way members of the Cybercrime Advisory Council and especially the EFCC have attempted to overcome these challenges through partnership, capacity building and enforcement of relevant laws and policies aimed at addressing the issue of cybercrime in Nigeria. The finding equally extends the criminological understanding of deviant behaviours and furthers the current discussion on the role of law enforcement in policing the Internet.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abubakar, A. S. (2009). Investigating Fraud Schemes in Nigeria. Paper presented at International Conference on Cooperation against Cybercrime. Retrieved from https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=09000016802f2643.
Adesina, O. S. (2017). Cybercrime and Poverty in Nigeria. Canadian Social Science, 13(4), 19–29.
Adesulu, D. (2017). Greed, Cause of Cybercrime—Don. Vanguard News. Retrieved 30 November 2017 from https://www.vanguardngr.com/2017/06/greed-cause-cyber-crime-don/.
Adomi, E., & Igun, S. (2008). Combating Cybercrime in Nigeria. The Electronic Library, 26(5), 716–725.
Akers, R. L., & Sellers, C. S. (2004). Criminological Theories: Introduction, Evaluation, and Application (4th ed.). Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing.
Alkaabi, A. O. S. (2010). Combating Computer Crime: An International Perspective. PhD thesis, Queensland University of Technology, Queensland. Retrieved from http://eprints.qut.edu.au/43400/.
Barnard, J. (2014, November 12). Global Economy Loses $445 to Cybercriminals a Year; Now They Are Gunning for Africa’s Easy Money. Mail & Guardian. Retrieved from http://mgafrica.com/article/2014-11-12-global-economy-loses-445bn-to-cyber-criminals-a-year-now-they-are-gunning-for-africas-easy-money.
Buono, L. (2010). Investigating and Prosecuting Crimes in Cyberspace: European Training Schemes for Judges and Prosecutors. ERA Forum, 11, 207–218.
Clarke, R. V. (2004). Technology, Criminology and Crime Science. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 10, 55–63.
Clarke, R. V., & Felson, M. (1998). Opportunity Makes the Thief: Practical Theory for Crime Prevention. Policing and Reducing Crime Unit: Research, Development and Statistics Directorate, 98, 1–36.
Clough, J. (2010). Principles of Cybercrime. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. K. (1979). Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A Routine Activity Approach. American Sociological Review, 44(4), 588–608.
Council of Europe. (2017). Nigeria: Cybercrime Policies and Strategies. Retrieved from https://www.coe.int/en/web/octopus/country-wiki/-/asset_publisher/hFPA5fbKjyCJ/content/nigeria/pop_up?_101_INSTANCE_hFPA5fbKjyCJ_viewMode=print&_101_INSTANCE_hFPA5fbKjyCJ_languageId=hu_HU.
Cybercrime Prohibition, Prevention Act. (2015).
Dalton, W. (2012). Cyber-crime Policing Completely Inadequate, Says Ex-Scotland Yard Detective. IT Propotal. Retrieved 15 November 2017 from https://www.itproportal.com/2012/11/22/cyber-crime-policing-completely-inadequate-says-ex-scotland-yard-detective/.
Dix, R. B. (2017). 5 Strategies for Addressing Cybercrime. GCN. Retrieved 10 March 2017 from https://gcn.com/articles/2017/01/11/strategies-addressing-cybercrime.aspx.
Felson, M. (1998). Crime and Everyday Life (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
Grabosky, P. (2001). Virtual Criminality: Old Wine in New Bottle. Social and Legal Studies, 10(2), 243–249.
Hassan, A. B., Lass, F. D., & Makinde, J. (2012). Cybercrime in Nigeria: Causes, Effects and the Way Out. ARPN Journal of Science and Technology, 2(7), 626–631.
ITU. (2012). Understanding Cybercrime: Phenomena, Challenges and Legal Response. Retrieved 20 July 2016 from http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/cyb/cybersecurity/docs/Cybercrime%20legislation%20EV6.pdf.
Kigerl, A. (2012). Routine Activity Theory and the Determinants of High Cybercrime Countries. Social Science Computer Review, 30(4), 470–486.
Kortjan, N., & Solms, R. V. (2014). A Conceptual Framework for Cyber-security Awareness and Education in Nigeria. South African Computer Journal, 52, 29–41.
Longe, O., Mbarika, V., Ngwa, O., & Wada, F. (2009). Crimincal Uses of Information and Communications Technologies in Sub-Saharan Africa: Trends, Concerns and Perspectives. Journal of Information Technology Impact, 9(3), 155–172.
Lopez, A. (2014). Routine Activity Theory of Crime. Retrieved 30 November 2017 from http://lemoncenter.com/routine-activity-theory-elements-crime.
Maghaireh, A. M. S. (2009). Jordanian Cybercrime Investigations: A Comparative Analysis of Search for and Seizure of Digital Evidence. PhD thesis, University of Wollongong. Retrieved from http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4404&context=theses.
McQuade, S. C. (2006). Understanding and Managing Cybercrime. New York: Allyn and Bacon.
Nwachukwu, E. (2012). Security Challenges and the Reform of Nigerian Police, File 11H: The Police 7. Ltn: An International Publication.
Odumesi, J. O. (2015). Approaches to Increase Public Awareness on Cybersecurity. African Journal on Computing and ICT, 8(4).
Olusola, M., Samson, O., Semiu, A., & Yinka, A. (2013). Cyber Crimes and Cyber Laws in Nigeria. The International Journal of Engineering and Science, 2(4), 19–25.
Owen, O. (2014). The Nigerian Police Force: Predicaments and Possibilities. Retrieved 30 December 2017 from http://www.qeh.ox.ac.uk/sites/www.odid.ox.ac.uk/files/nrn-wp15.pdf.
Saulawa, M. A., & Abubakar, M. K. (2014). Cybercrime in Nigeria: An Overview of Cybercrime Act 2013. Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization, 32, 23–33.
Sesan, G., Soremi, B., & Oluwafemi, B. (2013). Economic Cost of Cybercrime in Nigeria. Retrieved 10 June 2015 from https://pinigeria.org/downloads/research-reports/.
Smith, R. G. (2003). Investigating Cybercrime: Barriers and Solutions. Paper Presented at the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, Pacific Rim Fraud Conference, Sydney.
Tive, C. (2006). 419 Scam: Exploits of the Nigerian Con Man. New York: iUniverse Inc.
Tseloni, A., Wittebrood, K., Farrell, G., & Pease, K. (2004). Burglary Victimization in England and Wales, the United States and the Netherlands: A Cross-national Comparative Test of Routine Activities and Lifestyle Theories. British Journal of Criminology, 44, 66–91.
UNODC. (2013). Comprehensive Study on Cybercrime. Retrieved from https://www.unodc.org/documents/organized-crime/UNODC_CCPCJ_EG.4_2013/CYBERCRIME_STUDY_210213.pdf.
Wall, D. S. (1998). Catching Cybercriminals: Policing the Internet. International Review of Law, Computers and Technology, 12(2), 201–218.
Wall, D. S. (2007). Policing Cybercrimes: Situating the Public Police in Networks of Security within Cyberspace. Police Practice and Research, 8(2), 183–205.
World Information Technology Forum WITFOR. (2005a). Social, Ethical and Legal Aspects. Retrieved 10 July 2015 from http://www.witfor.org/2005/themes/social-projrct3.htm.
World Information Technology Forum (WITFOR). (2005b). Social, Ethical and Legal Aspects. Retrieved 13 June 2015 from http://www.witfor.org.bw/themes/social-projrct3.htm.
Yahaya, F. (2009). EFCC, Microsoft Tackle Scammers, Signs MoU. Retrieved 10 June 2015 from http://thenationonlineng.net/web2/articles/2031/1/EFCC-Microsoft-tackles-scammers-signs-MoU-/Page1.html.
Yar, M. (2005). The Novelty of Cybercrime: An Assessment in Light of Routine Activity Theory. European Journal of Criminology, 2(4), 407–427.
Yar, M. (2006). Cybercrime and Society. London: Sage.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bello, M., Griffiths, M. (2021). Routine Activity Theory and Cybercrime Investigation in Nigeria: How Capable Are Law Enforcement Agencies?. In: Owen, T., Marshall, J. (eds) Rethinking Cybercrime. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55841-3_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55841-3_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-55840-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-55841-3
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)