|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Following the example of Norway and other European Countries, such as
Sweden and Denmark, in April 2007 the Dutch government started filtering and
blocking web pages with child pornographic content. In this paper we present a research
into the technological, legal and practical possibilities of this measure. Our study leads us to
the conclusion that the deployment of filters by or on behalf of the Dutch government
is not based on any founded knowledge concerning the effectiveness of the approach. Furthermore,
the actions of the Dutch law enforcement authorities do not avail over legal
powers to filter and block internet traffic. Consequently the Dutch filtering practice
was found to be unlawful. The government could enact a law that provides the police with
the relevant powers. However, child porn filters always cause a certain amount of
structural overblocking, which means that the government is then engaged in structural blocking
of information that is not against the law. This would be in conflict with
basic rights as laid down in the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms
and in national legislation. Maintaining a blacklist that is serious in size (a
necessary condition for being effective), and at the same time is up-to-date and error-free
(which is needed to prevent overblocking), is very labour-intensive, if not impossible to
maintain. From the Dutch national police policy perspective it follows that putting so much
labour in maintaining a blacklist cannot be considered as a police task. Why then did the
Dutch police start filtering? In a society where child pornography is judged with
abhorrence, in which safety is rated higher then privacy, and in which managers and
politicians frequently have a naive faith in technology, the advocates of internet filters against
child pornography quickly find wide-spread support. Although this paper refers to the
situation in The Netherlands, it includes a number of elements and issues that are
relevant to other European States as well. |
||||||||||||||||||
