Opposition Calls for Tighter Limits on Digital Search Powers as Senate Passes Electronic Crimes Bill

Opposition Senator Malaka Parker urged the government to narrow the scope of new electronic evidence-gathering powers Monday, arguing that production orders under the Electronic Crimes (Amendment) Bill 2026 should be subject to the same level of precision as traditional search warrants.

While supporting the modernization of Antigua and Barbuda’s cybercrime laws, Parker told the Senate that Clause 3, which amends Section 18 dealing with production orders, should require investigators to clearly identify both the electronic data they are seeking and the digital locations where that data is expected to be found.

A production order, she said, is essentially the digital equivalent of a search warrant and should be governed by similar legal standards.

“We’re just saying, let us be as specific as possible,” Parker said. “Not just with the specified data, but also the locations that we’re going to search to find that specified data. That’s the same standard that we have for physical search warrants. I’m asking that to be applied for what we have called a production order, which is essentially a digital search warrant.”

Parker said the opposition was not attempting to weaken law enforcement’s ability to investigate cybercrime but was instead offering constructive suggestions to make the legislation more precise and better able to withstand constitutional scrutiny.

“I see no reason for us to be frustrated and get agitated just because we are doing our job as an opposition to offer constructive criticism,” she said. “If you agree, agree; if you disagree…”

She also said that whenever legislation grants broader investigative powers, Parliament has a responsibility to ensure adequate protections for citizens.

“I immediately look for the protections for citizens,” Parker said, adding that legislators should never enact laws in government that they would find unacceptable as private citizens. Every law, she said, should take into account the liberties of the people to whom it applies.

Leader of Government Business in the Senate Shenella Govia defended the bill, saying the amendments are necessary because criminals increasingly exploit technology to commit offences that once required physical access to banks, businesses and personal information.

“This one amendment has the power to significantly improve the administration of justice and strengthen our national security and protect innocent citizens,” Govia told the Upper House.

She said technological advances have fundamentally changed the nature of crime.

“Twenty years ago or 30 years ago, if a criminal wanted to steal money, they would probably use a weapon, a getaway vehicle and physical access to a bank or business. But right now they can do it electronically,” Govia said.

Govia recounted being targeted by cybercriminals who obtained information through hacked messaging groups and used details about organizations with which she was affiliated in an attempt to deceive her. She said the experience underscored the need to equip investigators with modern legal tools capable of responding to evolving cyber threats.

The Electronic Crimes (Amendment) Bill 2026 updates the country’s cybercrime legislation by expanding the courts’ ability to issue production orders for electronic evidence and strengthening cooperation requirements for telecommunications providers and other electronic service providers during criminal investigations.

Although Parker raised concerns about the drafting of Clause 3 and called for more narrowly tailored production orders, the bill proceeded through the committee stage without amendment. It was subsequently read a third time and passed by the Senate.

Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]