Chapter 1Introduction
Conduct of the inquiry
1.1On 16 June 2021, the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement (thecommittee) agreed to inquire into law enforcement capabilities in relation to child exploitation, with the following terms of reference:
Pursuant to subsection 7(1) of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement Act 2010, the Committee will inquire into and report on the capability of Australia's law enforcement agencies to tackle the growing scourge of child exploitation, with particular reference to:
(a)trends and changes in relation to the crime of online child exploitation;
(b)reviewing the efficacy of and any gaps in the legislative tools and tactics of law enforcement used to investigate and prosecute offenders;
(c)considering opportunities and suitability of streamlining legislative constraints to enable faster investigations that can better respond to rapidly evolving trends in offending;
(d)considering the use by offenders of encryption, encryption devices and anonymising technologies, and Remote Access Trojans to facilitate their criminality, along with the resources of law enforcement to address their use;
(e)considering the role technology providers have in assisting law enforcement agencies to combat child exploitation, including but not limited to the policies of social media providers and the classification of material on streaming services;
(f)considering the link between accessing online child abuse material and contact offending, and the current state of research into and understanding of that link; and
(g)any related matters.
1.2The committee's concern about this crime type was informed by the increased amount of time that many people—including children—spent online amidst the COVID-19 pandemic.
1.3The committee gathered useful evidence during the 46th Parliament but was not able to report before the House of Representatives was dissolved on 11April2022 for the general election. The dissolution of the House of Representatives also caused the committee to cease to exist.
1.4The committee was re-appointed in the 47th Parliament with mostly different members, and, on 3 August 2022, it agreed to re-initiate the inquiry. All evidence received during the previous parliament remained available to the committee.
1.5The committee received 54 submissions, comprising 32 during the 46thParliament and 22 during the 47th Parliament. Submissions were numbered sequentially: submissions1 to 32 were received in the 46thParliament; and submissions33 to 54 were received in the 47th Parliament. Alist of public submitters is at Appendix1. Additional information received by the committee is also listed at Appendix 1.
1.6The committee held six public hearings, all of which were in Canberra though some witnesses gave evidence from other locations. The hearings were on 9and10December 2021, 15 November 2022, 20February2023, 26 July 2023 and 10 August 2023. A list of witnesses at these hearings is at Appendix 2.
Figure 1.1Committee visit to the Australian Federal Police forensics facility in Majura, Australian Capital Territory, 15November2022
Source: photograph taken by committee secretariat.
From left: Acting Assistant Commissioner Stephen Dametto, Senator Helen Polley (Chair), AFP trainer and canine, Ms Louise Miller-Frost MP, Senator David Shoebridge, Mr Dan Repacholi MP, and CommanderHildaSirec.
1.7The committee's inquiry was also informed by site visits to the Australian Federal Police forensics facility on 15 November 2022 and to the Melbourne offices of the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (AUSTRAC) on 14March2023. Both these visits covered matters relevant to the inquiry. For example, the Australian Federal Police demonstrated the capabilities of technology detection dogs, which can detect hidden electronic devices such as USBs that may contain child abuse material. A photo from the AFP visit is on the previous page, and both visits are listed at Appendix3.
Structure of this report
1.8Considering the length of this inquiry across two parliaments, the large amount of evidence the committee received, and the complexity of the matters under examination, it would not be productive to exhaustively reproduce all issues raised by inquiry participants. This report examines key issues raised in evidence as follows:
Report summary—The summary preceding this chapter provides an overview of key evidence and the committee's recommendations.
Chapter 1—Introduction—sets out administrative details of the inquiry and includes notes on terminology and other matters.
Chapter 2—The crime of child exploitation—examines trends and changes in this crime, including its prevalence in Australia, and thereby conveys the criminal landscape to which law enforcement must respond.
Chapter 3—Criminal justice framework—surveys key legislation relating to child exploitation and reviews evidence about its appropriateness, including criminal offences and penalties.
Chapter 4—Law enforcement response to child exploitation—summarises the roles of key government agencies in relation to child exploitation, then considers evidence about challenges and opportunities for law enforcement's response to child exploitation.
Chapter 5—Technology and child exploitation—examines how technology is used by offenders to facilitate child exploitation and sets out evidence relating to the role of technology platforms in combatting this crime.
Chapter 6—Offending, prevention and education—surveys evidence about the extent of any link between contact and non-contact offending, as well as opportunities for prevention and greater public awareness.
Chapter 7—Conclusions and committee view—provides the committee's view and recommendations on matters discussed throughout the report.
Note on confronting material
1.9This report contains some confronting details about child exploitation which may be distressing for some people. The committee encourages readers to be conscious of this when they read the report, to take care, and to avail themselves of support services as needed.
Note on terminology
1.10When discussing child exploitation and sexual abuse, it is important to use appropriate language that recognises the gravity of the crime. This entails a range of important considerations, as discussed in the widely cited Terminology Guidelines for the Protection of Children from Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse, also known as the Luxembourg Guidelines.
1.11This report uses the term 'child abuse material' (CAM) as that is the terminology used in Commonwealth legislation. Some submitters and witnesses used related terms that can have overlapping meanings, including 'child sexual abuse material' (CSAM), 'child exploitation material' (CEM), and 'child sexual exploitation material' (CSEM). The committee is aware that 'CAM' can have a broader meaning than CSAM or CSEM, because it may refer to forms of violence that are not necessarily of a sexual nature.
1.12The committee affirms that the term 'child pornography' should be avoided. As the Department of Home Affairs submitted:
Use of the phrase "child pornography" is inaccurate and benefits child sex abusers because it:
indicates legitimacy and compliance on the part of the victim and therefore legality on the part of the abuser; and
conjures images of children posing in 'provocative' positions, rather than suffering horrific abuse.
Every photograph or video captures an actual situation where a child has been abused.
Note on evidence
1.13The committee first received evidence for this inquiry in August 2021. The length of the inquiry—partly due to the break between the 46th and 47thParliaments—has allowed the committee to pursue key matters of interest over time. However, the committee recognises that there have been important developments since the inquiry began and has been conscious of this when considering evidence. The committee has endeavoured to quote inquiry participants' most up to date evidence in this report.
1.14In addition, where an inquiry participant's name changed during the course of the inquiry, this report uses the participant's current name. This includes Facebook, which is now Meta, and Twitter, which is now X.
1.15Where this report quotes written evidence that contains a citation, the citation has been omitted from the quote.
Acknowledgements
1.16The committee acknowledges victims and survivors of child sex abuse in all its forms. It hopes that the evidence and recommendations of this inquiry will help to better protect children in future.
1.17The committee thanks all those who contributed to this inquiry by making written submissions or giving evidence at public hearings. The committee also thanks the Australian Federal Police and AUSTRAC for the informative site visits they hosted.