Derzeit wird auf der Europäischen Ebene der Vorschlag für eine neue Verordnung zur Verhinderung und Bekämpfung von Kindesmissbrauch im Internet diskutiert. Der Vorschlag soll die bislang nicht ausreiechenden Regelungen zum Schutz der Kinder verbessern und sieht mehrere Komponenten vor. Bislang hat in Deutschland vor allem der Begriff der “Chatkontrolle” dominiert, während andere Inhalte des Vorschlags weniger beachtet wurden.
In einer Kooperation mit dem Europäischen Zusammenschluss der Familienorganisationen COFACE Families Europe hat die AGF am 16. Februar in einem Fachgespräch mit weiteren Expert/innen die Ziele, Inhalte und die weiteren Schritte des aktuellen Vorschlags sowie weitere Schutzmaßnahmen diskutiert. Das Gespräch wurde auf Englisch geführt.
Programm
Moderators: Elizabeth Gosme, Director, COFACE; Sven Iversen, Director, AGF & Beatrijs Gelders, Policy and Advocacy Officer, COFACE
9.30-9.45 Welcome and round table of introductions
Sven Iversen, Director, AGF
9.45-10.15 Session 1: State of play of CSA regulation
Input by the European Commission
Q&A
10.15-10.30 Stretching break
10.30-11.15 Session 2: Risk assessment and mitigation
First reflections by DOT Europe
11.15-12.15 Session 3: Detection of CSA online
First reflections by John Carr, Online Safety Expert, UK Council on Child Internet Safety
12.15-13.30 Lunch
13.30-14.15 Session 4: EU Centre
First reflections by European Child Sexual Abuse Legislation Advocacy Group (ECLAG)
14.15-15.00 Final session: Conclusions and next steps
How can we work together to ensure protection of children from sexual abuse online?
Zusammenfassung der Diskussion
During a reflective discussion on the regulatory proposal, participants underscored the critical importance of priori-tising child protection needs. They deliberated on the challenges posed by double reporting obligations and ex-plored potential technological solutions like homomorphic encryption, while acknowledging their current limitations.
Existing regulatory frameworks such as the UK Online Safety Act and Germany’s proactive measures, exemplified by the Independent Commissioner for Child Sexual Abuse were discussed. Particularly German participants stressed Germany’s strong traditional emphasis on data protection, which is underscored in its constitution. Meanwhile, acknowledging this, participants highlighted the importance of the overarching imperative of preventing and combating child abuse online. It was agreed that this fine line needed a well-considered balance.
Emphasis was placed on the need for sustained collaboration among stakeholders, transcending national borders, to effectively address the scourge of online child abuse. Some participants pointed out the challenges that could arise from the double reporting obligation for companies. The opportunities and risks of possible technical solu-tions for child protection, including in encrypted environments were weighed up, but the current limits of the possibilities of child protection with strong encryption were also recognised. Participants stressed the collective responsibility of various sectors in combating this multifaceted issue, recognising that child rights organisations cannot tackle it alone.
As the discussion concluded, participants reiterated the importance of maintaining a nuanced approach, with a well-calibrated balance between privacy rights, victim protection and regulatory preventive measures. They em-phasised the necessity of steering legislative and regulatory endeavours towards a more robust and comprehen-sive framework for safeguarding and empowering the more vulnerable.