EU states to block child porn
EU member states will be able to block internet sites showing child pornography under rules expected to be introduced soon.
The European Parliament’s Civil Liberties Committee yesterday gave its nod to a number of European Commission proposals aimed at combating child sexual abuse, including harmonised criminal penalties across all member states.
According to the new rules, which still need to be approved by all 27 governments, child porno-graphy or child abuse material on the web must be removed at source in all EU countries. Where this is not possible, due to sites being hosted outside the EU, member states may still block the material in line with their national laws. To prevent abuse, the EP committee said national measures preventing access have to be transparent and provide adequate safeguards. The restriction must be limited to what is necessary and proportionate, and users have to be informed of the reason behind any restrictions.
Content providers and users also have to be informed of the chance to appeal, and to whom, under a judicial redress procedure.
Child abuse, particularly through the internet, is a growing problem across the EU and no real rules exist on how member states should intervene. The proposed EU directive to combat sexual abuse, sexual exploitation of children and child pornography will introduce tougher penalties across the EU for those who abuse or exploit children.
The proposal sets minimum penalties for 22 criminal offences but also allows member states to impose harsher measures and sentencing. Offenders will face penalties ranging from one to over 10 years in prison, depending on the crime. Since some 20 per cent of sex offenders go on to commit further offences after conviction, the committee introduced an amendment to the original proposal. It stipulates that convicted offenders “may be temporarily or permanently prevented from exercising professional activities involving direct and regular contact with children and volunteer activities related to the supervision or care of children”.
The directive will also introduce the right of employers to obtain information on any sex crime convictions when recruiting.
Member states may also take other measures, such as establishing sex offenders’ registers accessible to the judiciary or law enforcement agencies.
A clause on abuse by persons in a position of trust, authority or influence over the child (for instance, family members, guardians or teachers) is included and punishable under the new criminal offences. Higher sentences will also be imposed on anyone committing an offence involving children with a physical or mental disability, in a situation of dependence or under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
The Commission is aiming to conclude negotiations on this directive by the middle of the year.
(More stories from The Times in the news section)
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
'No need for early election if PM's...
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
20 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
R.Borg
Feb 16th 2011, 17:56
Hurry, EU.
Better late than never!
Do not take notice of the amoral individuals in our society.
Their soul is already damned.
J.Borg
Feb 16th 2011, 12:19
What about Peer To Peer sharing they need to find a solution to block child porn from this as well!!
G Borg
Feb 16th 2011, 12:07
M Bugeja, David Buttigieg, Charles Grima. Not everybody has the same pasttimes! Some people HIDE behind the excuse of 'censorship' to practice THEIR pasttimes! I see how considerate you are, and how emphatic, thinking of your fellow men, and protecting THEIR rights! Unless..........! Do you REALLY believe, that the adult who downloads adult porno will shut his eyes if a child 'happens' to appear on screen??
Ramon Casha
Feb 16th 2011, 12:00
Which country will set the standard age of consent for all others?
Joe Grima Brussels
Feb 16th 2011, 11:58
ABOUT TIME!
C. Attard
Feb 16th 2011, 11:50
I think that it is wrong to censor anything. Stop child porn from being produced in the the first place but don't mess with freedom of information. Today we will censor the internet using the excuse of child porn. Tomorrow we will filter something else... I read about what is being done here: http://malta-exposed.blogspot.com/2011/02/child-porn-ban.html
Adrian Camilleri
Feb 16th 2011, 11:23
Hands up all of those who think the government is going to use this law to block all content they feel is objectionable. OK, you can put your hands down now. The idea that the government needs to 'protect' us from content on the web is incredibly offensive. I will be the judge of what is objectionable thank you very much - that is my right as an individual. I will regulate my own internet viewing habits - that is my right as a free citizen. I will be responsible for ensuring that my children do not access objectionable material - that is my duty as a parent. The idea that the government will employ someone to look at obscene material all day long and TELL ME whether I can or cannot view it is totalitarianism. That's the kind of thing they do in Saudi Arabia and Yemen NOT something we do here in a modern democratic state.
M Bugeja
Feb 16th 2011, 11:07
Much as I am against the abuse of children, I must also express my strong objection to this motion being passed.
This is a form of censorship. Approving this will pave the way to approving the ban on more extreme fetishes and other controversial issues deemed to be only for mentally unstable people. This will eventually lead to the severe restriction of free speech, a fundamental human right in itself. Since filters will be applied at a national level, it is only too easy to have something similar to what happened in Egypt repeat itself.
Sites where child porn can be found are not that numerous. The EU should concentrate its efforts on closing these down. Furthermore, in the case of externally hosted sites, the EU would do well not to involve itself in the affairs of other countries; so many problems are prevalent at its very core, why doesn't it address those first? Case in point: illegal immigration, which is probably higher on most people's agenda than child porn.
Once again, I am against the abuse of children, but I am also against the abuse of power, especially by those who are already abusing it.
j farrugia
Feb 16th 2011, 13:38
IMHO you are wrong. This is not abuse of power, but responsible use of power. I WAS totally surprised to read this news. I was under the impression that child porn was already blocked. According to your logic, the authorites should not block (ban) printed child porn and would as you said and I quote:>This is a form of censorship> unquote. What's the difference between on-line child-porn and printed child-porn? I would say there s no difference at all, so, if we ban printed child-porn, and I hope you agree with this, the it is only right to ban and block internet chil-porn. To say other wise is illogical and worse.
Steve Farrugia
Feb 16th 2011, 14:11
Such a measure came by due to the consensus of the whole E.U. I disagree with you, as I believe this form of censorship is necessary - especially since it is a global crime (for instance, marriage to more than 1 partner at the same time is illegal in western countries - however, it is not in muslim countries ; and thus that would have been something which would have been imposed by misuse of power) . I strongly believe that these acts of pornography should be strongly prohibited in the civilized world, as we have the technology to do it. Of course, there might be some under-developed countries which might not agree, but this step, is a step forward, and I stand my ground when I say that This is a step that I'm proud of in the E.U Of course, there are other steps which I believe should be enforced more drastically in the E.U, for instance - a global minimum wage, global economic trends (purchases and selling) and a global taxation for a more consistent economic structure - bearing in mind the cost of transportation , as well as cost of manufacture.
S.Fenech
Feb 16th 2011, 14:17
Children are defenseless. The blockage of child-porn site has nothing to do with any fetish. It is just disgusting, and in order to protect the unfortunate children involved, such a decision is the first step in the right direction. Protection of children is not censorship. I am not against pornography as such as long as those involved in its production are consenting to it. I know there is a fine line where such issues are concerned, and I do not think this is the right platform to discuss the topic. But to put at par child pornography with other fetishes is definitely wrong.
If blocking child pornography is considered as abuse of power, what do you call the acts involving children in pornography.
Laws should be there to protect the citizens of any country. Such a law is not to protect the viewer, (as one tends to do when describing censorship) but the children being submitted to such atrocities. So I think that what you are saying in relation to censorship does not hold water, and leaks from all point of views you are trying to picture it.
D grima
Feb 16th 2011, 14:38
agree. Root out the suppliers of child porn but not impose a blanket ban.There has to be less censorship not more,which in effect means less liberty.
M Bugeja
Feb 16th 2011, 20:40
@G Borg(above)&al: Of course not, it's impossible to unsee something. However, most people who watch porn are better persons than many might thing. Is it so inconceivable that these very people would report childporn to the authorities? This ban is counterproductive-it will NOT stop the production of childporn, rather, prices will go up in underground circles and it will be more profitable. Face it, the moment something is outlawed, it instantly becomes more popular -case in point-alcohol in america, drugs in malta. No sirs, righteous and honourable as you might be, the only real solution is to single handedly hunt these people down. Child porn is a serious money making industry, much like drugs, and similarly, the bigwigs are often untouchables. Long story short: first step towards the infringement of our rights, many steps towards making the abuse of children profitable. So to summarise, much like outlawing drugs doesn't really protect anyone who really wants to take up the habit, banning childporn won't do squat to protect children. So, sirs, (especially j farrugia) THAT is being logical.
John Micallef
Feb 16th 2011, 10:18
Jiskantawni kif ghanhom il- wicc jghidu li ghadhom ma ghamluhiex anzi!!!
Ghalxiex ivutajna dalghodu wkoll!!!
AAzzopardi
Feb 16th 2011, 09:58
Why only the EU? It should be across the board for all countries/continents. Because I don't beleive that there is a country where child porn is legal. So be it North, South, East and West - it should be blocked everywhere - common agreement. In this way these so called producers (or better animals) will have less ways to reach the people - thus less money in their pockets - thus less children are required for such acts.
m vella
Feb 16th 2011, 09:41
They should block all pornography.
David Buttigieg
Feb 16th 2011, 09:49
Alas, we aren't Taliban and allow ADULTS to make their own decisions.
David Caruana
Feb 16th 2011, 09:54
Lol
Charles Grima
Feb 16th 2011, 10:50
If we ban anything that anyone might not like, it will be a pretty poor world. Child porn MUST be blocked from everywhere. A child is defenseless.
But should an adult decide he wants to see porn, i have no problems with that. It is his choice to decide what goes on.... But definitely not children abuse.... Those are sick people!
j farrugia
Feb 16th 2011, 13:17
The others are less sick.