Harsher penalties for child abuse imagery

Photo / Thinkstock

New, harsher penalties for making, trading or possessing child abuse imagery have been passed into law with unanimous support.

The Objectionable Publications and Indecency Legislation Bill passed its final stages in Parliament yesterday with backing from all parties.

Justice Minister Amy Adams said the law change sent a clear message that activities which sexually exploited children were abhorrent and would not be tolerated.

"The law changes reflect the ease with which criminals can now access, share and distribute child sexual abuse material, and address the changing ways perpetrators can communicate with children," Ms Adams said.

She said the bill would protect children who were "sadly often re-victimised by the knowledge that images of their abuse could be shared over the internet for years to come".

The legislation increased the maximum jail term for possessing, importing or exporting objectionable publications from five years to 10 years.

It clarified that possession included viewing the objectionable material, not just downloading or saving it.

The maximum penalty for supplying, distributing or making an objectionable publication increased from 10 to 14 years' jail time.

It introduced a new offence of "indecent communication with a young person", which applied to any communication with a person under 16 years old including text message and online contact.

The legislation also created a presumption of imprisonment for someone with previous offences related to child abuse imagery, and made changes to compensation for victims and rules around assisting people overseas to commit child exploitation.

Labour MP Poto Williams said her party had some concerns about changing the presumption of innocence, but it generally supported the bill's provisions.

Greens also backed the changes, though MP Catherine Delahunty said harsher sentences would not solve the deeply rooted social problems which led to child exploitation.

"We have to ask ourselves in what way do our infrastructures, social structures, and businesses collude with the predators, rather than just saying: "Lock up the predator, throw away the key, block them from the internet, everything will be fine.'"