The issue of cyber security is costing universal economy close to $500 billion every year and yet international cooperation and company defenses have continued to remain dangerously inadequate in combatting cybercrime. To assist in the issue, legislative powers have been erected to help in the prevention and persecution of cyber security criminals. However, Akin (2011, 750) points to the fact that prosecution of cyber criminals can be could be a difficult process due to jurisdictional boundaries. At the same time, prosecution of cyber criminals could also be difficult because different states have different legislations and international prosecution therefore would be difficult. This leads to the fact of lack of international procedures, universal statutes and mutual interest in cyber criminals’ prosecution universally.

The subject of international cooperation is an absolute necessity but the question is whether it would be efficient in fighting cybercrime asks Ballin & Ballin (2012). In an attempt to make an adequate legislation step to combatting cybercrime in 2001, the European Union produced a universal treaty that all EU members in their legislative powers must comply to. The panel in the EU legislation identified that big problem not in the lack of technological solutions but in the lack of one legal structure. Numerous countries were seen signing the treaty with inclusion of the United States.

The main purpose of this treaty was to lay out legislative powers with a statement that every country within the EU must have a law aimed at prosecuting all offenses that revolve around fraud, forgery, illegal access, data interception as well as illegal pornography (Gill & Phythian 2012). It is evident that complying to this legislation and treaty is a significant step forwards in combatting cybercrime and hopefully will provide the world with a more accessible approach to prosecuting and preventing activities that are yet to be performed through cyberspace.