Mechanism of Legal Regulation

To summarise this set of sources of national cybercrime legislation, it is necessary to identify their general imperfection and inconsistency. The main problem is that legal acts, as instruments of legal regulation, do not form a uniform system. The main laws, regulations and regulations were adopted at different stages of the establishment of the Institute for Combating Cybercrime in Ukraine and did not adapt to these changes in the context of understanding this phenomenon that occurred during its development. Therefore, the same phenomena may have different names or a broad and narrow understanding at the same time. The final published regulations have the force of law and set out the requirements. If an authority wishes to update or amend a regulation, it must follow the steps above. Some organizations may have additional steps to pass a regulation. Organizations may adopt one or more than one proposed version of a regulation, but all organizations must follow these basic steps to publish a regulation. It should be noted that almost the majority of researchers have to some extent studied the problems of legal regulation of the fight against cybercrime from various aspects, but they have not exhaustively studied the retrospective analysis of this legal phenomenon, development trends and the legal regulatory mechanism of the fight against cybercrime. In today`s reality, this area of the science of the theory and history of the state and law becomes particularly relevant. The mechanism of legal regulation of the fight against cybercrime is a clearly defined and organized system of legal instruments that provides legal influence through the application of normative rules for public relations that arise, change and end in the field of countermeasures to the commission of informational crimes, which makes it possible to influence the desired behavior of these participants in order to ensure an appropriate and effective fight against cybercrime.

The features of the legal framework of the Ukrainian legal regime for combating cybercrime are as follows: 3. Existence of international bilateral cooperation agreements in the field of legal regulation of combating cybercrime. Regulations are issued by U.S. federal agencies to interpret and implement laws passed by Congress. If Congress passes a law directing an agency to take action, the Department may issue an order that expands the language of the law. Not all laws require regulations. Agencies can generally enact, amend, or amend regulations without seeking additional action from Congress. In the context of economic globalization, regulatory studies have ceased to focus solely on independent bodies and state control over the economy. Scientists realized that some interactions of market participants, product standards or processes were no longer regulated by government intervention. On the contrary, they were regulated by international agreements or even self-regulatory agreements between private actors. As it seemed appropriate to address these new forms of economic governance, it has become common to deal with regulation without direct governmental authority.

Other studies have highlighted trends that determine the behaviour of certain actors without reference to a uniform regulatory purpose. Given the rapid globalization of cybercrime, it is clear that humanity needs an immediate fight against this phenomenon (E-Silva, 2017). In this context, the creation of legal and scientific mechanisms to combat cybercrime (Jhaveri et al., 2017) is an urgent issue. A large number of studies have also dealt with the empirical fact of regulation. These pragmatic and administrative perspectives inform regulation as an act of policy-making. The study of regulatory policy is informed by the tools of public policy analysis, organizational sociology and political science. In the 1950s, the American economist Marver H. Bernstein described the pace of regulation as a life cycle of regulatory commissions with periods of pregnancy, adolescence, maturity and old age. This perspective facilitated the analysis of initial activism in formulating a regulatory approach and specific management issues that arise during its lifetime.

Regulation had been classified as a specific type of public policy, suggesting that policies should be classified according to the degree and use of state coercion and that regulatory policy should be separated from distributive and redistributive policies. Theoretical debates on the concept of regulation reflect different disciplines and research agendas and can be broadly divided into approaches to regulation as an act of government and perspectives on regulation as governance. Regulation as a government activity has been extensively studied, including the reasons for regulation and the process by which it is implemented. The theory of economic regulation has been criticized for its risk of being tautological. Regulation exists because private interests have actually defended it, and therefore you can only know who has applied for it by determining who benefits from it. Therefore, a particular advantage of the industry is the cause and effect of regulation. While regulation in the narrow sense is defined as a specific economic policy aimed at controlling prices or market entry and access, the decline in regulation of several industries in the United States in the 1970s and 80s seems to refute this theory. Nevertheless, the theory of economic regulation as a model of interaction between economics and government is directly or indirectly embedded in various studies in the field of political economy. As in the EU context, regulatory reform specialists have also focused on regulation at the international level. In some sectors, such as e-commerce or telecommunications, international agreements have become crucial to control the behaviour of individuals in the market. In addition, many studies have highlighted the impact of business self-regulation or various public-private partnerships on the development, monitoring or implementation of targeted rules.

They showed how different forms of private authority structure the economic behaviour of companies in sectors as diverse as maritime transport, mining markets or financial services. Generally, the laws of the United States Code are referenced by the title, section, and sometimes the subsection. For example, agencies established under Title II, Subchapter A of the Public Health Preparedness and Response and Bioterrorism Act authorizing the regulation of certain agents by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services are codified as 42 U.S.C. 262a.4. Existence of Ukraine`s cybersecurity strategy, which determines the further development of national legislation on combating cybercrime. Thus, different strands of regulatory studies agree on the subject of regulation (the State), purpose (the behaviour of non-State actors), instruments (an authoritative set of rules) or scope (e.g. economics). However, they do not necessarily agree on all of these elements. The notion of regulation refers to the rules that structure the behavior of individuals in a particular context, without postulating where the rules come from and how they are imposed.

The most discussed types of legal instruments are laws and regulations. Laws are passed by both branches of Congress and signed by the president. Laws set requirements or prohibitions. Regulations are published by executive authorities to clarify their interpretation of a law and the implementation of a law. Regulations also contain requirements or prohibitions. A regulation within government that restricts, directs or otherwise controls social behaviour. For more information about when regulatory action is required, see the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 552).

Laws are passed by both branches of Congress and signed by the president.