Computer crime

A recent case has reached the Supreme Court (SC) and deals with an employee of a company who, after a dispute with the company over pending payments, blocked access to the company's computer server and encrypted the data. This caused the company's activity to be completely paralyzed and significant financial losses were incurred.

The first court that studied the case considered that the worker's behavior was clearly criminal according to the Penal Code and sentenced him for two crimes: computer damages and coercion. The penalties included both imprisonment and an obligation to pay the company for the damages caused. For the court, since it couldn't access the server, the company was completely blocked and, in addition, the worker tried to pressure the company to pay him what he was claiming, even leading the company to deliver a check (which was later canceled) under that pressure.

The Provincial Court reviewed the case and, although it upheld the facts and the sentence , it did modify the way to apply the offenses, considering them committed in medial competition (when some facts are a means for others), which implies a single higher penalty.

The case reached the SC. There, only errors in the application of the law can be debated (not whether the facts occurred or not). The SC confirms that the crime of coercion was indeed consummated and not in the stage of attempt, since the delivery of the check under pressure implies that the threat takes effect. Likewise, it considers that the computer damages fit since business paralysis is sufficient for this. Finally, the SC rejects reviewing the amount set as compensation, explaining that it is not its function to reevaluate the evidence or the facts, unless a very clear error is identified, which does not happen in this case.