A Global Movement to Protect Children The International

“A Global Movement to Protect Children” The International Centre for Missing & Exploited Children (ICMEC) is the leading global service agency working to protect the world’s children from exploitation and abduction.

ICMEC Core Functions • Works to combat child abduction and child sexual exploitation globally • Provides training and assistance to law enforcement, legal professionals, NGOs, and governments • Advocates for changes in laws, treaties, and systems to protect children worldwide; • Promotes the creation of national centers based on a public-private partnership model • Leads a global financial coalition to eradicate commercial child pornography

Global Campaign Against Child Pornography • Model Child Pornography Legislation • Financial Coalition Against Child Pornography • Training and Technology

Scope of the Problem • Cyberspace is home to more than one million images of tens of thousands of children being subjected to sexual abuse and exploitation. (ECPAT International, Violence Against Children in Cyberspace) • 200 new images of child pornography are posted daily. (Wortley and Smallbone, Child Pornography on the Internet)

Victims Are Getting Younger • In 2009, of reports made to the Internet Watch Foundation in the U. K. : – 72% of victims appeared to be children ages 10 or younger; – 23% appeared to be 6 years of age or younger; – 3% appeared to be 2 years of age or younger. Internet Watch Foundation, 2009 Annual and Charity Report • A 2005 report out of the U. S. showed that out of all arrested child pornography possessors: – 83% had images of children ages 6 to 12; – 39% had images of children ages 3 to 5; – 19% had images of infants and toddlers under age 3. Janis Wolak et al. , Child-Pornography Possessors Arrested in Internet-Related Crimes: Findings from the National Juvenile Online Victimization Study, 2005

Images Are Graphic and Violent • 92% had images of minors focusing on genitals or showing explicit sexual activity; • 80% had pictures showing the sexual penetration of a child, including oral sex; • 21% had child pornography depicting violence such as rape, bondage, and torture. Most of these images involved children who were gagged, bound, blindfolded, or otherwise suffering sadistic sex. Janice Wolak et al. , Child-Pornography Possessors Arrested in Internet-Related Crimes: Findings from the National Juvenile Online Victimization Study 5 (Nat’l Ctr. for Missing & Exploited Children ed. , 2005)

Dual Offenders 40% of arrested child-pornography possessors were “dual offenders, ” who sexually victimized children and possessed child pornography, suggesting there may be a correlation between simple possession and committing sexual abuse upon a child. Janice Wolak et al. , Child-Pornography Possessors Arrested in Internet-Related Crimes: Findings from the National Juvenile Online Victimization Study viii (Nat’l Ctr. for Missing & Exploited Children ed. , 2005)

Peer-to-Peer Activity The following screenshots show the worst offenders by IP address for peer-to-peer activity related to child exploitation image sharing over the last several months. One dot = one individual IP address If you were to click on that dot, you would see many more dots appear, all individual IP addresses that are sharing child exploitation images and videos with the first IP address. This is real time proof of the sharing of child sexual abuse images through peer-to-peer networks.

Armenia

Azerbaijan

Belarus

Georgia

Moldova

Russia

Ukraine

Challenge Laws in many countries are either nonexistent or woefully inadequate to penalize those who seek to victimize children through sexual exploitation or abduction.

Model Legislation Review of national legislation in place in 196 countries around the world to gain a better understanding of existing legislation and gauge where the issue stands on national political agendas.

5 Questions Asked 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Does national legislation exist with specific regard to child pornography? Does national legislation define “child pornography”? Does national legislation criminalize computerfacilitated offenses? Does national legislation criminalize possession of child pornography, regardless of the intent to distribute? Does national legislation require Internet Service Providers (ISP) to report suspected child pornography to law enforcement or to some other mandated agency?

Recommendations • • • “Child” for the purposes of child pornography offenses is defined as anyone under the age of 18, regardless of the age of sexual consent. The phrase “child pornography” is defined and that this definition includes computer- and Internet-specific terminology. Offenses specific to child pornography are created within the national penal code, including criminalizing the knowing possession of child pornography, regardless of one’s intent to distribute, and including provisions specific to downloading or viewing images on the Internet. There are criminal penalties for parents or legal guardians who acquiesce to their child’s participation in child pornography. Those who make known to others where to find child pornography are penalized. Grooming provisions are included, which penalize online enticement and the use of the Internet to entice, invite, or persuade a child to meet for sexual acts, or to help arrange such a meeting. Attempt crimes are punished. Mandatory reporting requirements are established for healthcare and social service professionals, teachers, law enforcement officers, photo developers, information technology professionals, ISPs, credit card companies, and banks. The criminal liability of children victimized by child pornography is addressed. There should be no criminal liability for children involved in pornography. Penalties for repeat offenders and organized crime participants are enhanced, and other aggravated factors are considered upon sentencing.

Results • 89 countries have no legislation at all that specifically addresses child pornography. • An additional 62 countries have insufficient child pornography legislation.

Legislation Specific to Child Pornography “Child Pornography” Defined Computer. Facilitated Offenses Simple Possession ISP Reporting Armenia Azerbaijan Belarus Georgia Moldova Russian Federation Ukraine Country

Council of Europe Member States Out of the 47 Member States of the Council of Europe: • 2 countries have no legislation specifically addressing child pornography offenses • 18 countries have legislation considered sufficient to combat child pornography • 24 countries do not define “child pornography” • 7 countries do not have legislation criminalizing computerfacilitated offenses • 10 countries do not have legislation criminalizing the knowing possession of child pornography regardless of the intent to distribute • No countries have enacted legislation mandating ISPs to report suspected child pornography to law enforcement

Global Movement Since 2006 • 19 countries have enacted legislation specifically criminalizing – for the first time ever – child pornography offenses • 23 countries have passed legislation defining the crime of child pornography • 26 countries have enacted legislation criminalizing computer-facilitated offenses • 27 countries have enacted legislation criminalizing the simple possession of child pornography • 2 countries have enacted legislation mandating ISPs to report suspected child pornography to law enforcement

Thank you! Sandra S. Marchenko Director, The Koons Family Institute on International Law & Policy International Centre for Missing & Exploited Children (ICMEC) Telephone: +1. 703. 837. 6340 smarchenko@icmec. org