states that the ‘‘primary task of combating the commercial sexual exploitation of children rests with the State and families.’’ 15
However, the extensive background paper on child pornography presented at the
conference as well as the congress’s child pornography panel all highlighted the role
of new technologies, particularly the Internet, and the global character of the problem.
It was argued that, whereas domestic legislation and increased enforcement led to a reduction in the production of child pornography in the 1980s, video and Internet technologies were dramatically changing the production and distribution of images of
child sexual abuse. The background report concluded that domestic efforts, such as
updating legislation to cover criminal activities made possible by new technologies,
must be ‘‘supported by global cooperation of an enormous magnitude.’’ 16 Although
increased enforcement of domestic legislation led to a decrease in child pornography
in the 1980s, such methods would not be sufficient to deal with the problems posed
by new technologies:
Regulation of child pornography in the computer age presents special challenges that require considerable technical expertise. . . . The establishment of an international resource organisation
which would employ a team of specialists in the areas of investigation, law enforcement, behavioural science, prosecution, law and computer technology could be an invaluable resource for the
global community. 17
Although it does not explicitly suggest reconceptualizing cooperation as a sustained
practice, it does strongly indicate that the problems posed by new technologies require
more than domestic implementation by states. It does clearly articulate that past practices, such as domestic legislation, would be insufficient. These debates are not reflected
in the formal outcome of the congress.
The International Conference on Combating Child Pornography on the Internet in
1999 focused almost exclusively on child pornography and new communications technologies. This conference also marked the introduction of filtering as an option to deal
with the problem. However, the discussion of filtering was limited to applications at
the individual level in order to ‘‘empower Internet users.’’ Efforts at the national and
international level focused on increasing international cooperation, since Internet
child pornography ‘‘does not know or respect borders.’’ 18
The fight against this abuse cannot be done alone but only through strong international cooperation, among governments, particularly law enforcement agencies, but equally important between
States and the Internet industry, hotlines and non-governmental organizations. 19
The result of the conference, the Vienna Commitment, called for ‘‘common measures
to speed up and enable the transborder use of coercive powers such as transborder
computer search and seizure’’ in conjunction with government, law enforcement, and
the Internet industry. 20 It explored the relationship between law enforcement organizations, Internet service providers, and ‘‘hotlines’’ to which illegal content could be
Barriers to Cooperation
59
However, the extensive background paper on child pornography presented at the
conference as well as the congress’s child pornography panel all highlighted the role
of new technologies, particularly the Internet, and the global character of the problem.
It was argued that, whereas domestic legislation and increased enforcement led to a reduction in the production of child pornography in the 1980s, video and Internet technologies were dramatically changing the production and distribution of images of
child sexual abuse. The background report concluded that domestic efforts, such as
updating legislation to cover criminal activities made possible by new technologies,
must be ‘‘supported by global cooperation of an enormous magnitude.’’ 16 Although
increased enforcement of domestic legislation led to a decrease in child pornography
in the 1980s, such methods would not be sufficient to deal with the problems posed
by new technologies:
Regulation of child pornography in the computer age presents special challenges that require considerable technical expertise. . . . The establishment of an international resource organisation
which would employ a team of specialists in the areas of investigation, law enforcement, behavioural science, prosecution, law and computer technology could be an invaluable resource for the
global community. 17
Although it does not explicitly suggest reconceptualizing cooperation as a sustained
practice, it does strongly indicate that the problems posed by new technologies require
more than domestic implementation by states. It does clearly articulate that past practices, such as domestic legislation, would be insufficient. These debates are not reflected
in the formal outcome of the congress.
The International Conference on Combating Child Pornography on the Internet in
1999 focused almost exclusively on child pornography and new communications technologies. This conference also marked the introduction of filtering as an option to deal
with the problem. However, the discussion of filtering was limited to applications at
the individual level in order to ‘‘empower Internet users.’’ Efforts at the national and
international level focused on increasing international cooperation, since Internet
child pornography ‘‘does not know or respect borders.’’ 18
The fight against this abuse cannot be done alone but only through strong international cooperation, among governments, particularly law enforcement agencies, but equally important between
States and the Internet industry, hotlines and non-governmental organizations. 19
The result of the conference, the Vienna Commitment, called for ‘‘common measures
to speed up and enable the transborder use of coercive powers such as transborder
computer search and seizure’’ in conjunction with government, law enforcement, and
the Internet industry. 20 It explored the relationship between law enforcement organizations, Internet service providers, and ‘‘hotlines’’ to which illegal content could be
Barriers to Cooperation
59