Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a multiannual Community programme on protecting children using the Internet and other communication technologies COM(2008) 106 final — 2008/0047 (COD)
Date: 2008-05-29
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: EU programme, Internet, child protection, information technology, public awareness campaign

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 224/61

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Decision of the
European Parliament and of the Council establishing a multiannual Community programme on
protecting children using the Internet and other communication technologies

COM(2008) 106 final — 2008/0047 (COD)

(2008/C 224/13)

On 7 April 2008 the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under
Article 153 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the

Proposal
programme on protecting children using the Internet and other communication technologies.

for a Decision of the European Parliament and of

the Council establishing a multiannual Community

On 11 March 2008 the Committee Bureau instructed the Section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and
the Information Society to prepare the Committee's work on the subject.

Given the urgent nature of the work, the European Economic and Social Committee appointed Ms Sharma
as rapporteur-general at its 445th plenary session, held on 28 and 29 May 2008 (meeting of 29 May 2008),
and adopted the following opinion unanimously. votes

1. Conclusions and recommendations

1.2.5
allocation in the future as a result of Hotline review.

A streamlining of Programme resources and funding

1.1
The European Economic and Social Committee praises
the Commission for its work already done towards addressing
the issues of child protection in regards to ‘online technolo-
gies’ (1), specifically noting that the average awareness level in
the population has been increasing thanks to campaigns by
social partners,
in particular NGOs and the Commission's
annual Safer Internet Days.

1.2
The EESC itself has drafted many opinions to highlight
the issues (2). Additionally it recommends an international part-
nership approach which encourages:

1.2.1
ideas
International sharing of data and pooling of
across governments, law enforcement, Hotlines, banking/finan-
cial/credit card institutions, child abuse counselling centres and
child welfare organisations and the internet industry.

EU and/or international ‘taskforce’ which meets quar-
1.2.2
terly to facilitate the sharing of data, expertise and good practice
law enforcement,
between stakeholders,
governments
internet
industry.

including Hotlines,

and, particularly,

international

the

1.2.3
Definition and promotion of an International and
European good practice model as regards the combating child
sexual abuse content on the internet by Hotlines.

1.2.4
A review of all existing and future Hotlines in light of
currently accepted good practice and the evaluation of Hotlines'
performance against new good practice models.

1.2.6
project.

Participation by Hotlines in the European database

Encouragement of Hotline, and other relevant organisa-
1.2.7
tions, partnerships with national domain name registries to de-
register domain names advocating the sexual abuse of children
or providing access to this content.

1.2.8
United efforts in raising awareness of the problems of
‘grooming’ and ‘cyber-bullying’ (3) and sign-posting to the rele-
law enforcement agency and children's charities where
vant
appropriate.

Introduction of support procedures for analysts and
1.2.9
those viewing the images working within the Hotline environ-
ment.

1.2.10 Work to ascertain and ensure the harmonisation of
legal frameworks in this area across member states.

1.2.11
Establishment of a Networking Office at Commission
level to act as independent assessor, coordinate research, review
Programme implementation and achievement of recommenda-
tions.

(1) For the purposes of this document, ‘online technologies’ refers to tech-
nologies that are used for accessing the Internet and to other communi-
cation technologies. In addition, in certain cases such as video games,
there are both ‘online’ and ‘offline’ uses of content and services and
both may be relevant to child safety.

(2) ‘Illegal content — Internet’ OJ C 61, 14.3.2003 p.32 and ‘Safer use of

the Internet’ OJ C 157, 28.6.2005 p.136.

1.2.12
the transfer of knowledge.

Establishment of an annual ‘Experts’ panel to intensify

(3) ‘Grooming’: Direct contact by predators who will befriend children in
order to commit sexual abuse; ‘cyber-bullying’: bullying in the online
environment.

C 224/62

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.8.2008

1.2.13
Establishment of Youth Forum to ensure the inclusion
of children and young people's views and experiences in
research and future Programme implementation.

is, a concrete ‘manageable’ target of around 3 000 websites
per year hosted around the world facilitating access to many
hundreds of thousands of child sexual abuse images.

1.2.14
such as Daphne and Safer Internet Programmes.

Proactive and collaborative use of funding streams,

Establish liaison with relevant US authorities

1.2.15
to
encourage reduction in the hosting of child sexual abuse
content
in the US and establish active trans-Atlantic data
exchange.

1.3 Working with a partnership approach ensures maximisa-
tion of expertise, knowledge dissemination and funding. Most
importantly it guarantees the involvement of stakeholders and
social partners in overall EU efforts to minimise illegal online
content and reduce access to it.

2. General Comments on the Commission's Proposal:

2.1
The internet and communication technologies (hereafter
referred to as ‘online technologies’) (4) were envisaged and
and
designed
researchers; however, they are now used in homes, schools, busi-
nesses and public administrations in most parts of the world.

communications

academics

tools

for

as

Children are active users of online technologies, and
2.2
increasingly so. But, beyond the benefits of interactivity and
participation in the online environment, they also face some
serious risks:

a) Direct harm, as victims of sexual abuse documented through
films or audio files and distributed online

photographs,
(child abuse material).

b) A perpetuation of victims' sexual abuse by the repeated
viewing of the records of their abuse due to widespread
online distribution and global availability.

c) Direct contact by predators who will befriend them in order

to commit sexual abuse (‘grooming’).

d) Victims of bullying in the online environment

(‘cyber-

bullying’).

2.3

Further trends (see Appendix 1) (5) include:

a) The fast and dynamic evolution of new technological land-
scapes, increasingly shaped by the digital convergence, faster
distribution channels, mobile internet, Web 2.0, Wi-Fi access
and other new content formats and online technological
services.

b) Recognition of the very young age of child victims and the

extreme severity of the sexual abuse they are suffering.

c) Clarification of the scale of the problem as regards publicly
available websites depicting the sexual abuse of children, that

d) Recent data regarding the regional hosting of child sexual
is

abuse networks suggests the majority of
hosted in the US.

this content

e) Recent data suggests that online child sexual abuse content
regularly hops host company and host country in order to
avoid detection and removal, thereby complicating law enfor-
cement investigation at a solely national level.

f) Lack of international efforts by domain name registries to
de-register domains advocating the sexual abuse of children
or providing access to such content.

g) The remaining and potentially, widening ‘generation gap’
between young people's use of online technologies and their
perception of risks verses the adults' understanding of its
use.

h) Public exposure to child sexual abuse material may be
reduced by voluntary industry blocking of individual URLs
by service providers.

i) The benefit of national recommendations regarding online
tools, such as filtering products, search engine security
preferences and the like.

2.4
from
Protecting internet users, particularly children,
exposure to illegal and ‘harmful’ content and conduct online,
and curbing the distribution of illegal content is a continuing
concern for policy and law-makers,
industry, end-users and
particularly parents, carers and educators.

2.5
From a legal point of view an essential distinction has to
be made between what is illegal on the one hand and ‘harmful’
on the other, since they require different methods, strategies and
tools. What is considered to be illegal may vary from country to
country, is defined by the applicable national law and is dealt
with by law enforcement, other government bodies and those
Hotlines with the appropriate authority.

The EESC requests that

the legislative harmonisation
2.6
across Member States is implemented and enforced at National
level and includes the following as minimum as set out in the
Council of Europe Cybercrime Convention (6):

a) What constitutes child sexual abuse material.

b) That the age of a child for the purposes of the victims of

child sexual abuse material is 18.

c) That the possession and viewing/downloading of online child
is an offence and warrants severe

sexual abuse material
custodial penalties.

(4) As 1.
(5) This appendix is available only in EN and can be found attached to the

electronic version of this Opinion on the Web.

(6) Council of Europe ETS 185 Convention on CyberCrime 23 XI 2001,

http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/185.htm.

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 224/63

2.7
Although certain Europe-wide standards have been estab-
lished, clarifying legal issues through various recommendations
and directives,
it should be established whether this data has
been converted into practice throughout member states.

2.12
However the EESC would ask for definitions and legal
clarifications in respect of the words ‘harmful’ and ‘conduct’,
particularly considering transposition into national law. Further
clarification is also required on the role of Hotlines, which do
not investigate suspects and do not have the necessary powers
to do so (See Appendix 2) (9).

‘Harmful’ content refers to content that parents, teachers
2.8
and other adults consider to be potentially harmful for children.
Definitions of such content vary across countries and cultures,
and can range from pornography and violence to racism, xeno-
phobia, hate speech and music, self-mutilation, anorexia and
suicide sites. As such, the EESC acknowledges it is difficult to
establish international partnerships regarding such material but
that national efforts could be made to raise awareness of tools,
methods and technologies to protect children from exposure to
it.

(Safer

The EU has been a forerunner in the protection of chil-
2.9
Internet
dren online since 1996, and the successive Safer
programmes
Internet Action Plan 1999-2004, Safer
Internet plus 2004-2008) have been major features in this field.
The Commission adopted a Communication on the implemen-
tation of the Safer Internet plus programme in 2005-2006 (7).
Additionally, an impact assessment between April and July
2007 (8) confirmed that the actions carried out have been effec-
tive, while stressing the need to adapt them to emerging internet
technologies and dynamic criminality in this area.

The objective of

2.10
the new programme will be to
promote safer use of the Internet and other communication
technologies, particularly for children, and to fight against illegal
content and illegal and ‘harmful’ conduct online facilitating
cooperation, exchange of experiences and best practice at all
levels on issues relating to child safety online, thus ensuring
European added value.

2.11
international cooperation as an integral part of each of them

The programme will have four actions encouraging

a) reducing illegal content and tackling harmful conducts

online,

b) promoting a safer online environment,

c) ensuring public awareness,

d) establishing a knowledge base.

(7) COM(2006) 661. Communication from the Commission on the imple-
mentation of the multiannual Community Programme on promoting
safer use of the Internet and new online technologies (Safer Internet
plus).

(8) http://ec.europa.eu/saferinternet.

3. An International Model

The internet is not owned or managed by huge multina-
3.1
tionals which control the content. It is made up of hundreds of
millions of pages posted by a multitude of publishers, making it
difficult to monitor or control illegal content. However, action is
possible from local
(the home) to national and international
level (including cyber space) to reduce the availability of illegal
content if all stakeholders work together.

3.2
The Internet Watch Foundation identified a core of
2 755 child sexual abuse websites hosted internationally during
2007; 80 % of these websites are commercial operations, which
frequently hop host company and region to avoid detection (10).
These tactics, coupled with the complex multi-national nature of
the crimes, mean that only a united global response involving
law enforcement authorities, governments and the international
online sector will enable effective investigation of these websites,
their content and the organisations behind them.

‘A partnership approach’

The EESC recognises that

3.3
is
required to ensure child protection. The Social partners,
including Government, the online industry,
law enforcement
agencies, child protection charities, businesses, employee repre-
sentatives, NGOs including consumer organisations, and the
public must work together to highlight the dangers and risks,
whilst at the same time allowing young people to gain from the
benefits of this revolutionary tool of socialising,
learning and
innovation.

3.4
The internet can be accredited with improving the
quality of life for many but especially for young people, the
elderly and many disabled people. It is a unique communication
tool, and more and more these days a ‘social network’. Changing
dynamics in lifestyles, families and employment patterns have
led to more independent or isolated periods of time. Therefore
protecting the user, in particular the vulnerable, especially chil-
dren, is a priority which cannot be left solely as a responsibility
of their guardians.

(9) This appendix is available only in EN and can be found attached to the

electronic version of this Opinion on the Web.

(10) The UK Hotline for reporting illegal content specifically: Child sexual
abuse content hosted worldwide and criminally obscene and incite-
ment to racial hatred content hosted in the UK * See Appendix 1 and 2
(available only in EN, can be found attached to the electronic version
of this Opinion on the Web).

C 224/64

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.8.2008

3.5
The emergence of new technologies and services is key
to innovation and growth of business globally. Young people are
often the first to understand the capabilities and take up these
innovations. However, along with development comes abuse
and this is a mounting concern. Self regulatory bodies of both
industry and stakeholders, have the in depth knowledge of these
technologies, with the possibility to develop counter measures
to combat this abuse. The sharing of knowledge, raising of
awareness and signposting consumers as to how to report sites,
together with a distribution of funds where possible to eradicate
such abuse, but especially in the context of child abuse, is an
essential duty and part of the internet industry's corporate social
responsibility.

3.10
The establishment of a ‘youth forum’ may be valuable
in the involvement of young people and the dissemination of
information to social networks utilised by those most vulner-
able. Youth have their own language and are often reluctant to
listen to authority but welcome advice from their peers within
their social environment. The ‘Rights of the Child’ must be
taken into account and therefore young people must be involved
in the process.

3.11
An effective model is required with commitment from
stakeholders to sharing information for adaptation to new and
emerging forms of internet criminality around the world and
the exchange of knowledge.

The scale and scope of the online problem of the distri-
3.6
bution of child sexual abuse content is the subject of much
speculation. However, as recognised in the Commission's report,
there is a lack of statistical information across the EU member
states. Efforts should be directed at tracking the movements and
activities of websites associated with the distribution of child
sexual abuse content
to provide information to
authorised bodies and international law enforcement to effect
the removal of such content and the investigation of its distribu-
tors.

in order

Such organisations must be established at national levels
3.7
and meet regularly with the EU Commission to formulate strate-
gies. A Platform at EU level, with industry, government,
banking/financial/credit
education,
employer and employee representation, could be a valuable tool
for rapid analysis and action across the Union, with dissemina-
tion of information beyond EU borders to facilitate international
law enforcement cooperation.

card institutions, NGOs,

An EU ‘expert meeting’ every year regarding the develop-
3.8
factors and law
ments surrounding technology, psychosocial
enforcement should be encouraged in order to intensify the
transfer of knowledge. Conclusions from these meetings would
be disseminated to all European Member States, and platform
members, in order to be adapted, integrated or used at National
and local level.

The establishment of a ‘Networking Office’

in Brussels
3.9
which researches projects not only from Europe but globally,
would support the Platform to ensure knowledge is up to date
and relevant, including statistics, with the dissemination of effec-
tive processes which combat the issues and can be quickly trans-
ferred to active partners. Visits and monitoring would also be
the role of the network office. Additionally, the Office could act
as an independent Hotline assessor, and review applications for
new projects to ensure the prevention of duplication of work
already done, and effective and efficient usage of funds. Partner-
ships could also be proposed by the Office. The role of the
network office would be to react to new challenges at the same
speed as their developments.

4. Guidelines for Hotline Implementation

4.1

A good practice model for Hotlines:

4.1.1
ment of illegal online content.

Hotline analysts trained and recognised in the assess-

4.1.2
tially illegal online content.

Hotline analysts with expertise in the tracing of poten-

An evidenced partnership approach with all key
4.1.3
national stakeholders including government, banking/financial/
credit card institutions, law enforcement, organisations working
with families, children's charities and, particularly, the internet
industry.

4.1.4
effective partnership with the national
adherence by them to a Code of Practice.

Co- and self-regulatory Hotline, showing evidenced
internet industry and

4.1.5
content hosted by any national company.

‘notice and take-down’ of

Universal

illegal online

4.1.6
project of child sexual abuse URLs.

Participation in the centralised European database

Commitment to achieving blocking at network level by
4.1.7
national internet companies of a dynamic list of child sexual
abuse websites to protect users from accidental exposure.

Hotlines
in their
to have comprehensive websites
4.1.8
national
language providing a simple, anonymous reporting
mechanism with clear sign-posting to Helplines and other rele-
vant organisations regarding off-remit issues such as grooming
and cyber-bullying.

4.1.9
issues.

Awareness-raising of the Hotline function and related

4.1.10
gence and expertise sharing.

Evidence of European and international data, intelli-

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 224/65

4.1.11
Participation in European and international partner-
ships with stakeholders to share data, intelligence and pool ideas
in order to combat the cross-border nature of these crimes.

4.1.12
Action at a European and international level to enable
the removal of child sexual abuse content on the internet and
investigation of its distributors, wherever that content is hosted
around the world.

Contribution to any national or international bodies
4.1.13
set up to take international ownership of combating these
websites and facilitate the collaboration of multi-national
law
enforcement agencies.

4.1.14
Dissemination of guidelines to employers, teachers,
organisations, parents and children such as the ‘ThinkuKnow’
education programme by the CEOP — The Child Exploitation
and Online Protection Centre (UK police).

4.1.15
Awareness raising focus on internet users, particularly
in partnership with or with sponsorship from national online
companies.

Organisations to be a member of INHOPE, the Inter-
4.1.16
national Association of Internet Hotlines, ensuring that interna-
tional good practice sharing between Hotlines and industry can
be used to remove content (11).

4.1.17
vidual anonymity for reporters and with rapid processing.

Reporting procedures must be simple, upholding indi-

4.1.18
Hotline operators must provide processes that ensure
a level of support and counselling for analysts working within
the viewing and data processing environment.

4.2

In addition, Hotlines should:

companies

a) Develop partnerships with their national domain name
registry
regularly
to ensure
providing access to child sexual abuse content, or with
names advocating sexual activity with children, are investi-
gated and de-registered.

that domains

b) Seek to obtain voluntary funding on a self-regulatory basis
from national
from the
Hotline's operation of a reporting mechanism, a ‘notice and
take-down’ service and the provision of dynamic block lists.

internet companies who benefit

d) Encourage

the

fostering of positive

relations between
Hotlines and Helplines offering signposting facilities with
victim support organisations, in order to promote comple-
mentary awareness raising of relevant and up-to-date issues.

5. Specific Comments: Commission Proposal

The Proposal of the Commission leaves several

5.1
unanswered:

issues

a) Who will coordinate the proposed measures, and with what

qualification?

b) How are the criteria for the single areas being formulated?
Many programmes already established would fit more than
one criteria of the proposed Knowledge Database (12).

c) Who chooses the appropriate candidates?

d) Who is

a
networking of these projects?

responsible

for

continuing evaluation and

5.2
Addressing the above questions would prevent reinven-
tion of the wheel, duplication of work already done, and ensure
effective and efficient usage of funds. Most importantly it must
be guaranteed that experts from the field will be actively
involved in the initiative in close co-operation with consultants
or civil servants. This would also hold true of the proposal
above for a ‘Networking Office’ at Commission level which
researches such projects, gets to know them, visits them and
keeps in contact.

Consideration must be given by the Commission in
funding

5.3
towards more proactive and collaborative use of
streams, such as Daphne and Safer Internet Programmes.

Finally the Committee requests the Commission to stress

5.4
the importance and impact of:

— Adoption throughout member states of the ‘notice and take-
down’ by Hotlines and the internet industry of child sexual
abuse content.

— Wider adoption of the initiative to protect internet users by

blocking access to child sexual abuse URLs.

c) Encourage or facilitate the blocking of child sexual abuse

websites by the internet industry in that country.

— International effort by domain name registries and relevant
authorities to de-register domains associated with child
sexual abuse.

(11) Sept 2004-Dec2006 INHOPE processed 1.9 million reports, 900 000
from the general public, 160 000 forwarded to law enforcement agen-
cies for action.

(12) For example: Innocence in Danger ‘Prevention Project’ would fit more

than one of the criteria. There are many other such examples.

C 224/66

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.8.2008

The above measures would reduce the occasions when
5.5
internet users might be exposed to traumatic and
innocent
unlawful
images, diminish the re-victimisation of children by
restricting opportunities to view their sexual abuse, disrupt the
accessibility and supply of such content to those who may seek
out such images and disrupt the dissemination of images to
internet users for commercial gain by criminal organisations.

Importantly, the implementation of the activities would
5.6
make operations increasingly difficult
those behind the
distribution of child sexual abuse content. Whilst the dynamic
nature of the crime and the technological sophistication of the
offenders make it difficult to wipe out entirely, the more costly,

for

risky and transient operations are made, the less likely this
appears to be an easy route for gain, whether financial or other-
wise.

5.7
Recent data regarding the scope and scale of child sexual
abuse websites (not individual images or URLs) provide further
encouragement in the fight towards total eradication. Concrete
targets can now be set to demonstrate the benefits of data
sharing and ‘ownership’ at the highest international
level and
the impact of a positive and successful united international part-
nership in substantially reducing the numbers of child sexual
abuse websites.

Brussels, 29 May 2008.

The Chairman

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Directive of the
European Parliament and of the Council on roadworthiness tests for motor vehicles and their
trailers

COM(2008) 100 final — 2008/0044 (COD)

(2008/C 224/14)

On 16 April 2008, the Council of the European Union decided to consult the European Economic and
Social Committee, under Article 80(2) of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on roadworthiness tests for motor vehicles and
their trailers.

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no
comment on its part, it decided, at its 445th plenary session of 28 and 29 May 2008 (meeting of 29 May
2008), with 85 votes in favour and two abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 29 May 2008.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS