Child Pornography - Home | National Rapporteur on Trafficking in ...

Implementation
The possible reason for the workload is the fact that not all cases can be dealt with. In the view of the
authors of the Programme of Improvements in Tackling <strong>Child</strong> <strong>Pornography</strong>, the existence of the pending
cases is primarily a consequence of a shortage of capacity. 335 They argue that, with the current resources,
it is possible to handle around 700 investigations focusing on possession of material constituting a
criminal offence. This means that an average of 100 to 300 cases are left unopened every year. 336 On
average 1.3% of the total police capacity is used in tackling sex offence cases, including child pornography.
The Twente and Gelderland-Midden regional police forces deploy the highest capacity, at 2.1%. 337
Prioritisation, evaluation and steering
Activities are prioritised at the beginning of the investigation (as well as investigations that originate
from other countries) upon intake or when a report arrives. 338 Prioritisation is determined by means
of structured consultations with the Public Prosecutor (OvJ), the Liaison Officer for Victims of Sexual
Abuse (ZAO) and/or via a case consultation. The case list is sent fairly frequently to the Public Prosecution
Service, usually in addition to the (case) consultation. 339 Investigations within the regional police
force must be supplied for information purposes to the mainstream (regional) steering and evaluation
team as a minimum requirement. 340
The usual bottlenecks occur during prioritisation, evaluation and steering. It is not easy to prioritise
activities in the investigations, as in most cases it is only possible to ascertain that a specific Internet
identity is involved in the uploading or downloading of images, and it is not possible to determine
whether the suspect could be a producer or is only in possession of material. The focus of the investigation
is unknown a priori. It remains a complex task during the course of the investigation, as well – to
distinguish between possessors and producers. 341 A prioritisation model is necessary in the investigation
that can be used to weigh up factors as early as possible in the detection process. Tools are also necessary
in order to ensure objectivity in doing so. These tools are not yet widely available, but they must
be developed (further). A prioritisation model has already been used on an experimental basis in the
Zambezi test bed that was recently rounded off (§3.4.2). 342
A variety of models are used by the regions for the purpose of prioritisation and setting criteria. The
weight assigned to criteria usually depends upon the viewpoint of the detective handling the case. The
335 <strong>National</strong> <strong>Child</strong> <strong>Pornography</strong> Project, 2008.
336 Programme of Improvements in Tackling <strong>Child</strong> <strong>Pornography</strong>, 2009.
337 Programme of Improvements in Tackling <strong>Child</strong> <strong>Pornography</strong>, 2011. The authors also reported that no exact
figure can be provided for the capacity that has been made available for tackling child pornography due to
the considerable diversity and differences amongst organisational forms that sex offence divisions take.
338 Implementation Provisions concerning child pornography (Article 240b of the Dutch Criminal Code),
2010A025, Dutch Government Gazette 2 December 2010, no.19121.
339 Programme of Improvements in Tackling <strong>Child</strong> <strong>Pornography</strong>, 2011.
340 Implementation Provisions concerning child pornography (Article 240b of the Dutch Criminal Code),
2010A025, Dutch Government Gazette 2 December 2010, no.19121.
341 <strong>National</strong> <strong>Child</strong> <strong>Pornography</strong> Expertise Centre, Public Prosecution Service and Police, 2010 (not publicly
available).
342 Programme of Improvements in Tackling <strong>Child</strong> <strong>Pornography</strong>, Business case for tackling child
pornography.
169