One of the most important functions that we as legislators have is to ensure that our legislation offers children the type of protection to which they are entitled and which will provide them with the opportunity to enjoy a carefree and happy childhood. The Bill before the House is one that offers further assurance that all that can be done by way of legislation is being done to protect our children from having their childhood blighted by abuse, in particular by sexual abuse.
The Child Trafficking and Pornography Bill, 1997, is the latest legislation that offers protection against sexual abuse. There is no need for me to recite a list of such legislation; suffice to say that even in the recent past we have passed the Criminal Law (Incest Proceedings) Act, 1995, which arose from a Private Members' Bill which I introduced in the previous Dáil; the Sexual Offences (Jurisdiction) Act, 1996, which I, together with my colleague, Deputy Eoin Ryan, published by way of a Private Members' Bill and the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act, 1997, with its important stalking provision. In addition, the Children Bill, 1996, will update the law on the protection of children against abuse, including sexual abuse, in certain circumstances.
There is an important document in the pipeline which I will be publishing shortly, namely, the interim report of the working group on the illegal and harmful use of the Internet. The working group will report on the very difficult issue of what can be done at a national level to deal with objectionable material such as child pornography being transmitted to this country from all parts of the globe by means of that most personal and modern means of communication, the Internet. One other important document which I published last month is the discussion paper on the law on sexual offences. The paper deals with many issues relevant to child sexual abuse, including the age of consent to sexual relations and other matters raised in the report of the Law Reform Commission on child sexual abuse, issues surrounding the establishment of a sex offenders or paedophile register and child prostitution. The paper has provided the impetus for a public debate and a backdrop to consideration of the need for further changes in the criminal law to combat the problem of sexual exploitation and abuse.
The manner in which international agencies co-operate and share their expertise in trying to understand the problem of child sexual abuse and the role child pornography plays in that abuse was brought home to me when I had the privilege of opening the first conference on Combating Paedophile Information Networks in Europe, or COPINE Conference, in Dublin Castle last December. This project is funded under the EU STOP programme; it is a partnership between the Child Studies Unit in the Department of Applied Psychology at Cork University, the Paedophile Unit of the London Metropolitan Police, An Garda Síochána and the Association for European Law Enforcement Co-operation in Brussels. The conference addressed many issues of importance, including paedophile activity on the Internet, something that can only be realistically combated through international co-operation. While such international co-operation is critical in tackling the problem of child sexual abuse, we must not lose sight of the need for our own national response.
The Bill before the House is an important and integral part of the ongoing programme of legislation aimed at providing comprehensive protection against sexual abuse or exploitation. Child sexual exploitation can take many forms, ranging from direct physical sexual assaults to the depiction of children in pornographic materials. The making of child pornography constitutes child sexual abuse and can often involve the most horrendous violation and abuse of children. With increasing globalisation and greater movement between countries, new forms of child sexual exploitation have begun to emerge. To deal with the continuing and changing nature of the problem, imaginative and novel responses by both law enforcement agencies and legislators are required.
The Bill also represents a response to the horrific events surrounding the Belgian paedophile ring which was uncovered in 1996. The tragic fate of the young Belgian children who fell victim to that paedophile ring galvanised the EU into immediate action. It was during our Presidency of the EU, when those events came to light, that a joint action on trafficking in human beings and sexual exploitation of children was negotiated. This Bill will give effect to the provisions of that joint action as it applies to children.
The Bill offers protection to children against exploitation in three main ways. First, it protects children against being trafficked for the purpose of their sexual exploitation. Second, it protects children against being used in the making of child pornography, and third, by criminalising the possession of child pornography, it protects children from abuse by persons whose fantasies have been fuelled by watching child pornography. The first and second of these protections are obvious, the third not so obvious. Child pornography is one form of temptation for paedophiles and potential child sex abusers. Possessing and looking at child pornography by paedophiles poses a real threat to children by reinforcing cognitive distortions and fuelling fantasies. Child pornography can also be used in grooming or conditioning possible child victims into believing that what they are watching constitutes normal behaviour. There can be no comparison in this context between the possession of child pornography and the possession of other forms of pornography for personal use. This is why it is necessary to specifically outlaw child pornography in all its manifestations. The making and use of child pornography by paedophiles is frightening. Most of us will never see it unless we come upon it accidentally, because it tends to circulate among paedophile rings and not otherwise.
There may still be some people who think of paedophiles as pathetic old men, as much to be pitied as feared. Nothing could be further from the truth. Paedophiles may appear to be ordinary people who live apparently ordinary lives but they can be highly manipulative and seductive, often charming themselves into people's confidences so that they can insinuate themselves into a position where they have unsupervised access to children. They are capable of taking the long view, even spending years to get themselves into positions of trust with the parents of their targeted victim. They will similarly use the devious side of their characters to obtain positions of trust, power and responsibility directly over children. Not all persons who possess child pornography are necessarily paedophiles. However, all paedophiles will probably possess child pornography; it could almost be described as a necessary accessory to their activities. It is this connection between paedophilia and child pornography which this Bill targets.
Since its publication last December, this Bill has received a welcome response both inside and outside the Oireachtas. Quite a number of amendments were made to it in the other House, with the result that the Bill in its present form represents an effective measure in the fight against child sexual exploitation, a measure which I am sure we are all anxious to see passed into law as speedily as possible. It is worth bearing in mind when discussing this Bill the comment made by a member of the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child when, during the discussion on Ireland's initial report on the convention, he said Ireland was to be commended on its pioneering legislation on the sexual exploitation of children.
I would like to turn now to the actual provisions in the Bill. Section 2 deals with interpretation and the most important definition it contains is that of "child pornography". Defining the expression "child pornography" is something of a departure from the approach heretofore of leaving it to the courts to interpret what is meant by "obscene" or "indecent". It is important in a Bill such as this to give the prosecuting authorities and the courts a clear indication of what exactly we, as legislators, mean by the term "child pornography". It does not matter how the child pornography is represented or how it is made, it is caught by the definition. For example, section 2 (2) puts it beyond doubt that any figure resembling a person that has been generated or modified by computer graphics is comprehended by the definition of "child pornography" if it conveys the impression that the figure is that of a child. This means that any person who would try to circumvent the legislation by means of computer technology would not succeed. There are exceptions in the definition. It will not apply to any written material which has been examined by the Censorship of Publications Board and in respect of which a prohibition order under the Censorship of Publications Acts is not in force. Neither will it apply to any film or video work which the official censor has passed for release. These are common sense exclusions which will mean that the present criteria in respect of material in books, periodical publications, films and videos passed by the censors will not be affected by the Bill.
The other important definition in section 2 is that of a "child". There are several different ages for which one could make a case. The most logical and appropriate age is 17 years since that is the age of consent to sexual relations in this jurisdiction.
Section 3 is the first of four sections in which new offences are created. Section 3(1) makes it an offence to organise or knowingly facilitate the journey into, out of or through the State of a child for the purpose of his or her sexual exploitation, or to provide accommodation for a child for such a purpose while in the State. This section gives effect to one of the most important aspects of the EU Joint Action on Trafficking in Human Beings and Sexual Exploitation of Children. The seriousness with which this offence is regarded is reflected in the penalty of up to life imprisonment.
The ingredient in this offence which makes it so serious is that it concerns children being taken from their family, community, and indeed their own country, and trafficked across international borders to another country, possibly on the other side of the world, for the purpose of their sexual exploitation. We are giving a clear message in this provision to any would be traffickers in children that they would use this country for their despicable trade at their peril. We will not allow children to be brought into or out of this country for the purpose of their sexual exploitation and we will not allow this country to be used as a transit point for such children.
The term "sexual exploitation" is used to include not just trafficking for the purpose of using children in the production of child pornography, but also trafficking for the purpose of inducing or coercing children into prostitution or other sexual activities. Section 3(2) creates offences of taking or detaining or otherwise using children for the purpose of their sexual exploitation. To a large extent it reinforces a provision in section 17 of the Non-Fatal Offences against the Person Act, 1997. Section 17 deals with the abduction of children by persons other than their parents and has a maximum penalty on conviction on indictment of seven years imprisonment. The extra ingredient in this provision is that the taking or detaining of the child is for the purpose of his or her sexual exploitation and, because of that extra ingredient, we are providing a higher penalty on conviction than for the offence in the 1997 Act, that is, up to 14 years imprisonment.
Section 4 of the Bill makes it an offence for any person who has the custody, charge or care of a child to allow that child to be used for the production of child pornography. It parallels a provision in the Children Bill, 1996, under which it will be an offence for any person who has the custody, charge or care of a child to cause or encourage the commission of unlawful sexual intercourse or buggery with that child or to cause or encourage the seduction or prostitution of, or the commission of a sexual assault upon, the child. Section 4 and the provision in the Children Bill, 1996, are aimed at persons such as parents or guardians who, for whatever reason but usually monetary gain, allow their children to be so sexually exploited. Is there a worse breach of trust than parents allowing their children to be sexually exploited by others? The term "custody, charge or care" is defined in such a way as to encompass other persons in whose care the child may be and would include, for example, childminders or swimming coaches.
Section 5 is aimed at persons who would profit from child pornography, although it also catches persons who are involved in the child pornography business for other reasons as the profit motive may not always be a significant factor in the dissemination of child pornography. Under this section it will be an offence to knowingly produce, distribute, print, publish, import, export, sell or show any child pornography. While elements of it are required by the EU joint action, it is a comprehensive provision which attempts to deal with any person who is knowingly involved in any way in the child pornography trade.
The word "knowingly" is necessary because it is possible for child pornography to be distributed or imported without the knowledge of the distributor or importer. This arises in particular in the case of those involved in providing Internet services who would not be in a position to police everything that is available on the Internet. This issue will be dealt with in the Report of the Working Group on the Illegal and Harmful Use of the Internet to which I referred. Therefore, in fairness, the prosecution in any case will have to satisfy the court that the defendant knowingly distributed or imported child pornography.
Section 6 will make it an offence to knowingly possess child pornography. This provision is also required by the EU joint action and, from some of the comments I made earlier about the potentially horrific effects of child pornography, I need to say little more to explain or justify it. The offence of possession will not apply in three circumstances: first, where it is in the possession of a person who is exercising his or her functions under the Censorship Acts or the Video Recording Acts; second, where possession is for the purpose of the prevention, investigation or prosecution of offences under the Bill, and third, where the possession is for the purposes of bona fide research. Similarly, the offences in section 5 will not apply in the same three circumstances.
I mentioned that the maximum penalty on conviction for trafficking in children will be life imprisonment. The maximum penalty on conviction for possession of child pornography will be five years on indictment. The other offences all carry a maximum penalty of 14 years imprisonment. These are without doubt severe penalties but they are necessary if we are to offer our children the protection they deserve. There can be relatively minor manifestations of some of these offences and the fact that provision is made for a summary charge in some cases reflects that.
The remaining provisions of the Bill are relatively straightforward and routine and I will comment briefly on a number of them. Section 10 will amend the Criminal Evidence Act, 1992, by allowing evidence to be taken from children by television link in cases involving child trafficking and child pornography. It does this by adding the offences created in sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of this Bill to the other offences in the 1992 Act for which children can give evidence by television link.
Section 12 amends the Bail Act, 1997, by adding the offences under two of the sections of this Bill to the list of offences in the Schedule to the 1997 Act for which a court may refuse bail to a person on the ground that such a refusal is reasonably considered necessary to prevent the commission of a serious offence by that person. The offences that are being added to that Schedule are those for which I consider there would be a likelihood of the person committing a further offence while on bail.
Section 11 amends the Schedule to the Sexual Offences (Jurisdiction) Act, 1996, by adding to it the section 3 and 4 offences, namely, trafficking and taking or otherwise using a child for the purpose of sexual exploitation and allowing a child to be used for the production of child pornography. This means that if those offences are committed outside Ireland by a person ordinarily resident in Ireland, on his or her return to this country he or she will be treated as if the offences took place here and will be prosecuted accordingly.
This is a critically important Bill. Some years ago the necessity for such a Bill might not have been clear. However, in the light of what we now know and the advances of modern technology, this legislation has become essential. I hope it will have a speedy passage through the House and can become law without delay. I commend the Bill to the House.