#FactCheck-Video Falsely Shared as Nepal Expelling Bangladeshis; Actually Shows Anti-Encroachment Drive in Dhaka

Introduction

‍
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has transcended its role as a futuristic tool; it is already an integral part of the decision-making process in various sectors, including governance, the medical field, education, security, and the economy, worldwide. On the one hand, there are concerns about the nature of AI, its advantages and disadvantages, and the risks it may pose to the world. There are also doubts about the technology’s capacity to provide effective solutions, especially when threats such as misinformation, cybercrime, and deepfakes are becoming more common.

Recently, global leaders have reiterated that the use of AI should continue to be human-centric, transparent, and governed responsibly. The issue of offering unbridled access to innovators, while also preventing harm, is a dilemma that must be resolved.

‍

AI as a Global Public Good

‍

In earlier times only the most influential states and large corporations controlled the supply and use of advanced technologies, and they guarded them as national strategic assets. In contrast, AI has emerged as a digital innovation that exists and evolves within a deeply interconnected environment, which makes access far more distributed than before. Usage of AI in a specific country will not only bring its pros and cons to that particular place, but the rest of the world as well. For instance, deepfake scams and biased algorithms will not only affect the people in the country where they are created but also in all other countries where such people might be doing business or communicating. 

‍

The Growing Threat of AI Misuse

‍

• Deepfakes, Crime, and Digital Terrorism
  The application of artificial intelligence in the wrong way is quickly becoming one of the main security problems. Deepfake technology is being used to carry out electoral misinformation spread, communicate lies, and create false narratives. Cybercriminals are now making use of AI to make phishing attacks faster and more efficient, hack into security systems, and come up with elaborate social engineering tactics. In the case of extremist groups, AI has the power to give a better quality of propaganda, recruitment, and coordination.

‍

• Solution - Human Oversight and Safety-by-Design
  To overcome these dangers, a global AI system must be developed based on the principles of safety-by-design. This means incorporating moral safeguards right from the development phase rather than reacting after the damage is done. Moreover, human control is just as vital. Artificial intelligence (AI) systems that influence public confidence, security, or human rights should always be under the control of human decision-makers. Automated decision-making where there is no openness or the possibility of auditing could lead to black-box systems being developed, where the assignment of responsibility is unclear.

‍

Three Pillars of a Responsible AI Framework 

‍

1. Equitable Access to AI Technologies
   One of the major hindrances to global AI development is the non-uniformity of access. The provision of high-end computing capability, data infrastructure, and AI research resources is still highly localised in some areas. A sustainable framework needs to be set up so that smaller countries, rural areas, and people speaking different languages will also be able to share the benefits of AI. The distribution of access fairly will be a gradual process, but at the same time, it will lead to the creation of new ideas and improvements in the different places where the local markets are. Thus, there would be no digital divide, and the AI future would not be exclusively determined by the wealthy economies.
2. Population-Level Skilling and Talent Readiness
   AI will have an impact on worldwide working areas. Thus, societies must not only equip their people with the existing job skills but also with the future technology-based skills. Massive AI literacy programs, digital competencies enhancement, and cross-disciplinary education are very important. Forecasting human resources for roles in AI governance, data ethics, cyber security, and modern technologies will help prevent large scale displacement while also promoting growth that is genuinely inclusive.
3. Responsible and Human-Centric Deployment
   Adoption of Responsible AI makes sure that technology is used for social good and not just for making profits. The human-centred AI directs its applications to the sectors like healthcare, agriculture, education, disaster management, and public services, especially the underserved regions in the world that are most in need of these innovations. This strategy guarantees that progress in technology will improve human life instead of making the situation worse for the poor or taking away the responsibility from humans.

‍

Need for a Global AI Governance Framework

‍

• Why International Cooperation Matters
  AI governance cannot be fragmented. Different national regulations lead to the creation of loopholes that allow bad actors to operate in different countries. Hence, global coordination and harmonisation of safety frameworks is of utmost importance. A single AI governance framework should stipulate: 

• Clear responsible prohibition on AI misuse in terrorism, deepfakes, and cybercrime .
• Transparency and algorithm audits as a compulsory requirement.
• Independent global oversight bodies.
• Ethical codes of conduct in harmony with humanitarian laws.

Framework like this makes it clear that AI will be shaped by common values rather than being subject to the influence of different interest groups.

‍

• Talent Mobility and Open Innovation
  If AI is to be universally accepted, then global mobility of talent must be made easier. The flow of innovation takes place when the interaction between researchers, engineers, and policymakers is not limited by borders. 

‍

• AI, Equity, and Global Development
  The rapid concentration of technology in a few hands poses the risk of widening the gap in equality among countries. Most developing countries are facing the problems of poor infrastructure, lack of education and digital resources. By regarding them only as technology markets and not as partners in innovation, they become even more isolated from the mainstream of development. An AI development mix of human-centred and technology-driven must consider that the global stillness is broken only by the inclusion of the participation of the whole world. For example, the COVID-19 pandemic has already demonstrated how technology can be a major factor in the building of healthcare and crisis resilience. As a matter of fact, when fairly used, AI has a significant role to play in the realisation of the Sustainable Development Goals.

‍

Conclusion

‍
AI is located at a crucial junction. It can either enhance human progress or increase the digital risks. Making sure that AI is a global good goes beyond mere sophisticated technology; it requires moral leadership, inclusion in governance, and collaboration between countries. Preventing misuse by means of openness, supervision by humans, and policies that are responsible will be vital in keeping public trust. Properly guided, AI can make society more resilient, speed up development, and empower future generations. The future we choose is determined by how responsibly we act today.

As PM Modi stated ‘AI should serve as a global good, and at the same time nations must stay vigilant against its misuse’. CyberPeace reinforces this vision by advocating responsible innovation and a secure digital future for all.

‍

References

‍

• https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/ai-a-global-good-but-must-guard-against-misuse-pm-101763922179359.html
• https://www.deccanherald.com/india/g20-summit-pm-modi-goes-against-donald-trumps-stand-seeks-global-governance-for-ai-3807928
• https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/need-global-compact-to-prevent-ai-misuse-pm-modi/articleshow/125525379.cms

‍

Introduction

In the multifaceted world of international trade and finance, cross-border transactions constitute the heart of economic relationships that span the globe. The threads that intertwine forming the fabric of global commerce are ceaselessly dynamic and exhibit an intricate pattern of complexity especially when it comes to the regulated movement of capital. It's a domain where economies connect, where businesses engage in sublime commerce, and where technology and regulation intersect at critical juncture. These guidelines will play a critical role in the regulation of capital, fortification of financial integrity, and transparency of regulatory and cross-border payments. The key highlights of this regulation include strict pre-authorization for non-bank entities, mandating specific accounts for import and export PA-CBs and a transaction ceiling of 25,00,000 Rupees.

The Vigilance of RBI 

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI), ever vigilant in its shepherding role over the nation's financial stability and integrity, has taken decisive strides to dispel the haze that once clouded this critical sector. With the issuance of a revelatory circular dated October 31, 2023, the RBI has unveiled a groundbreaking framework that redefines the terrain for these pivotal financial entities, aptly christened as Payment Aggregators – Cross Border (PA-CB). In deploying this comprehensive array of regulations, the RBI demonstrates a robust commitment to harmonizing and synchronizing the oversight of payments within the country's financial fabric, extending its meticulous regulatory weave from domestic Payment Aggregators (PAs) to the PA-CBs, a sector previously undistinguished in formal oversight.

The prescriptive measures announced by the RBI are nothing short of a regulatory beacon that cuts through the fog of uncertainty, illuminating a clear path forward for entities dedicated to facilitating cross-border payment transactions pertaining to the import and export of permissible goods and services in India through online modes. Inclusiveness is a hallmark of the RBI’s directive, encompassing a diverse cadre of financial actors, ranging from Authorized Dealer (AD) banks and conventional Payment Aggregators (PAs), to the emergent breed of PA-CBs actively engaged in processing these critical international payment transactions.

Key Aspects of Regulation

One of the most striking aspects of this new regulatory regime is the RBI's insistence on pre-authorization. All non-bank entities providing PA-CB services are impelled to apply to the apex bank for authorisation by April 30, 2024. This is far from a perfunctory gesture; it represents a profound departure from the bygone era when these entities functioned under a patchwork of provisional guidelines and ad-hoc circulars. Indeed, with this resolute move, the RBI signals its intention to embrace these entities within its direct regulatory gambit, an acknowledgement of the shifting tides and progressive intricacies characteristic of cross-border payments.

The tapestry of new rules is complex, setting forth an array of prerequisites for entities aspiring for authorization. For instance, non-bank PA-CBs are obliged to register with the Financial Intelligence Unit-India (FIU-IND) as a preliminary step before commencing the application process. Moreover, the financial benchmarks set are notably rigorous. Non-banks must boast a minimum net worth of ₹15 crores at the time of the application—a figure that escalates to a robust ₹25 crores by the fiscal deadline of March 31, 2026.

Way Forward

As if these requirements weren't indicative enough of the RBI’s penchant for detail and precision, the guidelines become yet more granular when addressing specific types of PA-CBs. Import-only PA-CBs are mandatorily obliged to maintain an Import Collection Account (ICA) with an AD Category-I scheduled commercial bank, while export-only PA-CBs are instructed to maintain an Export Collection Account (ECA), which can be maintained in Indian Rupees (INR) or any permissible foreign currency. The nuance here is palpable; payments for import transactions must be received in a meticulously managed escrow account of the PA, prior to being funneled into the ICA for smooth settlement with overseas merchants.

Conversely, export-only PA-CBs' proceeds from international sales must be swiftly credited to the relevant currency ECA. This meticulous accounting ensures that the flow of funds is both transparent and traceable, adhering to the utmost standards of financial probity.

Yet, perhaps the most emphatic of the RBI's pronouncements is the establishment of a transaction ceiling. PA-CBs have their per-transaction limit capped at ₹25,00,000 for each unit of goods or services exchanged. This calculated move is transparent in its objective to mitigate risk—a crucial aspect when one considers the potential implications of these transactions on the country’s fiscal health and the integrity of its financial systems.

It is no exaggeration to declare that with these guidelines, the RBI is effectuating a seismic shift in the regulation of cross-border payment transactions. There's a fundamental transformation taking place—a metamorphosis—from a loosely defined existence of PA-CBs to one of distinct clarity, under the direct and unswerving supervisory gaze of the regulator. The compliance burden, indeed, has become heavier, yet the return is a compass that points decisively towards secure harbours.

As we embark upon the fresh horizons that these rules bring into view, it is imperative to acknowledge that the RBI's regulatory innovations represent far more than a mere codification of dos and don'ts. They embody a visionary stride towards safeguarding and fortifying the architecture of international payments, a critical component of India's burgeoning presence on the world economic stage.

Conclusion 

The journey ahead, as we navigate these newly charted waters with the RBI's guidelines as our steadfast North Star, will no doubt be replete with challenges, adaptations and learning curves for the array of operational entities. But it is with confidence we can say, the path is set; the map is clear. The complex labyrinth of cross-border financial transactions is now demystified, and the RBI's clarion call beckons us towards a future marked by regulation, security, and above all else, reliability in the cosmopolitan tapestry of global trade. RBI’s guidelines provide a comprehensive framework for standardizing cross-border financial transactions in India. This decision is a monumental step towards maintaining cyber peace in cyberspace. 

References:

• https://www.rbi.org.in/Scripts/NotificationUser.aspx?Id=12561&Mode=0
• https://www2.deloitte.com/in/en/pages/tax/articles/tax-alert-Regulation-of-payment-aggregator-cross-border-pa-cb.html
• https://www.jsalaw.com/newsletters-and-updates/rbis-new-guidelines-to-govern-payment-aggregators-in-cross-border-transactions/ 

‍

India’s Rapid Digital Expansion

‍
‍

‍

Over the past decade, India has experienced a rapid digitalisation process. The rise of digital financial services,  affordable internet costs, and the penetration of smartphones have transformed the way people communicate, transact and do business online.

Online payment systems, including Unified Payments Interface (UPI), have enabled real-time transactions between banks and financial systems. As much as these systems have enhanced access to finance and efficiency, they have also created new opportunities for cybercriminals.

Cybercrime has evolved alongside the shift of financial and social interactions to digital platforms. The fraud attacks on online payments, online banking, and personal information have become common and increasingly costly.

To analyse the scale and trend of cybercrime in India, this analysis will use the datasets released by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) and financial fraud data released by the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) under the Ministry of Home Affairs.
‍

The Rise of Cybercrime in India
‍

‍

The Rise of Cybercrime in India
‍

Source: National Crime Records Bureau – Crime in India Reports

The data released by the NCRB documents cybercrime incidents registered by the police at the national level under the Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act) and criminal provisions covering offences such as cheating, impersonation, and digital fraud. In the past, the offences were listed in the provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Following criminal law reforms in India, on 1 July 2024, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which replaced the IPC, came into force. Section 419 (cheating by impersonation), IPC, would be related to BNS Section 319 and Section 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property), which would be related to BNS Section 318(4). Similarly, crimes involving forgery and use of forged documents or electronic documents, which were previously contained in the IPC Sections 465-471, are dealt with in BNS Sections 335-340.

The data published by the NCRB represent the number of crimes that reached the point of the First Information Report (FIR) registration, meaning they reflect only cybercrime cases that were formally presented to the law enforcement system to investigate, rather than all complaints reported. The data shows that cybercrime cases increased from 27,248 in 2018 to 86,420 in 2023, a 3.17-fold increase in 5 years.

Two structural shifts are visible: the post-pandemic jump and subsequent acceleration.

However, these figures likely underestimate the true scale of cybercrime because many incidents are reported only through online complaint portals and may not result in FIR registration.
‍

The Financial Scale of Digital Fraud

‍

‍

The Financial Scale of Digital Fraud

‍

Source: Ministry of Home Affairs via,  Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C), and National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal (NCRP)

This dataset tracks financial fraud complaints reported through the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal (NCRP) and the estimated financial losses associated with those complaints.

The financial losses reported between 2021 and 2024 increased by 41 times over four years, compared to 2021, from 551 crore to 22,848 crore. At the same time, the number of complaints rose from 262,846 to over 1.9 million, an increase of ~623%, indicating both rising victimisation and greater public awareness of reporting mechanisms.

The contrast between these two trends is striking:
‍

While complaints increased by around 7 times, financial losses increased by over 40 times. 

‍

‍

Distribution of Cyber-Fraud Complaints and Financial Losses by Fraud Type
‍

Source: Ministry of Home Affairs via Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre and National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal; analysis based on reporting in Business Standard using government cyber-fraud data.
‍

This divergence implies an uneven relationship between the number of incidents and the financial damage that they inflict. Most cyber fraud incidents involve relatively small transaction values; however, a smaller group of fraud categories result in disproportionate numbers of financial losses.
‍

‍

Distribution of Financial Losses Across Major Cyber-Fraud Categories in India

‍

Source: Ministry of Home Affairs via,  Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C), and National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal (NCRP) figures reported by The Indian Express
‍

As reported by The Indian Express, based on the data compiled by the I4C, investment-related scams alone account for roughly 77% of reported cyber-fraud losses, followed by smaller shares from “digital arrest” scams (8%), credit card fraud (7%), sextortion (4%), e-commerce fraud (3%), and malware or app-based fraud (1%). This distribution means that even though scams with lower values, like phishing, OTP fraud, and small payment fraud, produce a high proportion of complaints, few categories of fraud produce most of the financial losses.

‍

Analysis

‍

1. Cybercrime is expanding faster than most traditional crimes: The fact that cybercrime cases have tripled in five years shows that cyber offences are presently becoming a significant element of Indian crime. Unlike conventional crimes that require physical proximity, cybercrime can be conducted remotely and at scale, enabling perpetrators to target large numbers of victims simultaneously.

2. Financial losses are concentrated in a small set of fraud categories: As cases of cybercrimes have been on the increase, the monetary losses of digital fraud cases have been increasing at a higher rate. The fact that the number of reported financial losses has increased 40 times in 4 years indicates that cybercrime has a very high economic impact.

3. Complaint volumes and financial damage follow different patterns: When comparing complaints and financial losses, it is evident that cyber fraud losses are unevenly distributed across types of incidents. Most of the prevalent scams reported, including phishing or OTP fraud, involve relatively small transaction values but yield a high portion of complaints. Conversely, fewer categories of fraud, especially investment-based schemes, contribute a significantly higher percentage of total financial losses.

4. Digital financial infrastructure has expanded the attack surface: India’s rapid adoption of digital payment systems, mobile banking and digital  financial systems has dramatically increased the number of potential victims of cybercriminals. The scale of online transactions creates new vulnerabilities that organised cybercrime networks take advantage of.

5. Reporting improvements reveal previously hidden crime: The expansion of national reporting systems has enhanced the transparency in the trends of cybercrime. The increase in the number of complaints recorded is partially due to improved reporting systems and not necessarily to the increased criminal activity, meaning that previous data might have understated the magnitude of cyber fraud.

Recommendations
‍

1. Move from reactive policing to proactive cyber-risk monitoring: The conventional models of policing focus on investigation of crimes that have already taken place. With such a magnitude and pace of cyber fraud, India should have systems that are designed to detect and prevent the fraud at its early stages, such as real-time observation of suspicious patterns in transactions by financial institutions.

2. Strengthen financial intelligence sharing across institutions: There are a lot of instances of cyber fraud that use more than one bank, payment system, and telecommunication provider. To detect new networks of fraud sooner, it can be suggested to establish more information-sharing measures between the financial institution and law enforcement agencies.

3. Target organised cyber fraud networks rather than individual incidents: Many digital scams operate through organised networks that coordinate phishing, mule accounts, and fake payment channels. The solution in regard to this involves dismantling these networks through investigative procedures instead of treating incidents on a case-by-case basis.

4. Improve recovery mechanisms for stolen funds: The recovery of the funds lost is one of the most difficult issues in cases of cyber fraud. Expanding systems such as the Citizen Financial Cyber Fraud Reporting and Management System (CFCFRMS) can improve the speed at which fraudulent transactions are frozen or reversed.

5. Strengthen digital financial literacy: A significant percentage of cyber frauds are based on social engineering methods that take advantage of user behaviour as opposed to technical weaknesses. Victimisation can be greatly reduced through specific public awareness efforts on typical scam schemes.

Conclusion
‍

India’s experience illustrates a broader global trend: as economies digitise, crime increasingly follows the flow of digital money. While cybercrime incidents are rising steadily, the much faster growth in financial losses suggests that cybercriminals are becoming more organised, technologically sophisticated, and economically motivated.

‍

References:
‍

• https://indianexpress.com/article/india/indians-lost-rs-53000-crore-fraud-cheating-cases-six-years-maharashtra-2025-10452185/ 
• https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2226441&reg=3&lang=2 -
• https://www.ncrb.gov.in/crime-in-india.html 
• https://i4c.mha.gov.in/index.aspx 
• https://i4c.mha.gov.in/index.aspx 

‍