Framework of recommendations and best practice

• Pages: 11-20

11

Framework of recommendations and best practice

The purpose of th e framework of recommendations and best practice is to provide a

tangible foundation for improvements to be implemented. They build on the analysis

conducted throughout the Study and the gaps and chall enges identified in the research.

They are aimed at the European Commission, the European Parliament, the Council of the

EU, Member States, INHOPE, the hotlines, LEAs and ISPs.

Recommendations are arranged in thematic clusters where certain recommendations are

contingent on others. In total there are 25 recommendations across these 10 thematic

clusters. A high-level summary of the recommendations is presented bel ow:

1. Adopt a clear and comprehensive definition of CSAM

Rationale: Whil e Directive 2011 /93/EU provides the basis for what i s considered CSAM

(under the child pornography definition), the Directive’s definition is not consistently

reflected across Member States and lacks the detail to ensure a common understanding of

what types of material are included in the definition (level of nudity or sexual/sexually

suggestive act covered, inclusion/exclusion of live material, virtual CSAM). As a result,

what is understood as CSAM differs from one Member State to another.

The internet knows no boundaries and material can spread easily across countries and

continents. The lack of a uniform definition and understanding of what consti tutes CSAM

thus presents practical difficulti es for INHOPE hotlines in processing reported materi al, as

well as an opportunity for offenders to choose jurisdictions to host illegal content more

easily.

To whom: European Commi ssion, European P arliament, Council of the EU and Member

States (for its transposition).

Actions:

1. Directive 2011/93/EU should be amended to provide a more comprehensive

definition of CSAM.

2. Guidelines should be adopted by the Commission to accompany the definition

and provide examples of the types of material (i.e. formats, types of acts, body

parts, context etc.) covered by the CSAM definition.

2. Adopt an EU definition of CSEM

Rationale: There is a wide range of material circulating online which is of a sexual or

sexually suggesti ve nature and harmful to children. The Luxembourg Termi nology

guidelines refer t o this type of material as child sexual exploitation material (CSEM).

Harmful content depicting children is widel y accessible and, in some cases, violates their

data protection rights. Desk research showed gaps in the clear definition or classification

of CSEM, and consequently in the processes to ensure its prompt takedown from the

internet. No hotline is specifically mandated by law to handle CSEM, although a small

majority of the hotlines voluntarily handle it.

To whom: European C ommission, European Parliament, Council of the EU and Member

States.

Actions:

1. Directive 2011/93/EU should be amended to include a definition of CSEM and

an obligation for Member States to take measures to prompt removal of

webpages containing or disseminating CSEM hosted in their territory .

2. The EU should adopt guidelines on what con stitutes CSEM and what

differentiates CSEM from CSAM. The guidelines should indicate the provisions it

may violate and detail the notice-and-takedown process.