While condemning child pornography and reiterating that the Institute believes it be repugnant, the Freedom of Expression Institute needs to record its concern regarding further legislation to censor the Internet. Because of the heinous nature of pornography, issues surrounding it are often responded to in an emotive and knee-jerk fashion and regulation of the Internet and child pornography sites is no different with Deputy Minister Lindiwe Sisulu herself being quoted as using words like "vicious" to describe the government approach.

The methods being discussed are not, we believe, the solutions to the problem and we would therefore advise future legislators to consider carefully what measures they will take particularly in the light of the technological and infinite nature of the medium and the fact that no matter what filtering devises are introduced they will always ultimately be circumvented.

A major concern is the responsibility that any future legislation may impose on Internet Service Providers in the light of recommendations that the measures will expect them to report offenders and store child porn images as evidence. This is extremely problematic as it shifts the responsibility of law enforcement, a function of a government, on to the service providers. Encouraging private individuals, that is service providers, to collect images could also result in witch hunts against users, regardless of whether they are merely visiting a site because they were inadvertently lured there or visiting it out of curiosity.

A further problem - particularly in relation to stations with public access - exists where there are multiple users of one station as, because of the difficulty in identifying the specific user accessing child pornography images, all users would be suspects.

Placing filters on the Internet too has its down side because the first sites to suffer on those focusing on health and reproductive rights, AIDS, breast cancer and human rights issues. In addition, filtering images can increase the divide between those who know and those who don't know the technology of the Internet because with the introduction of filtering software, more filtering techniques are mastered often leaving the ordinary user behind. Furthermore, the people who would set the standards for what gets filtered, will in all likelihood not reflect the diversity of South African society.

In its original submission to the task team drafting the new Films and Publications Act, FXI argued that it did not believe it was necessary to make possession of child pornography a crime precisely because it would give the authorities the leeway to conduct raids on private homes. Consequently we do not believe it is necessary to give law enforcement officers more power than that contained in the Criminal Procedure Act to raid people's homes.

With regard to the problem relating to South African children being used in child pornography, this is obviously an area which should be dealt with under the Sexual Offences Act and law enforcers should make it their business to uncover those involved in the industry and to bring them to book for contraventions of this act.

In conclusion, while sympathising with government on the issue of child pornography, FXI calls upon government to confront the matter in a way which reflects a consideration of the many implications of further legislation including the possible impact on the expansion of the Internet on the continent.

Issued 6 August 2000

Contacts: Laura Pollecutt @ 011 403 8403 or Nanagolo Leopeng @ 082 8975452