Proposition 55K0101

Projet de loi visant à combattre la diffusion non consensuelle d'images et d'enregistrements à caractère sexuel.

General information ¶

Author

LE Vanessa Matz

Submission date

July 10, 2019

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

protection of privacy information technology psychological harassment criminal law

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP DéFI Open Vld N-VA LDD MR PVDA | PTB VB

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

April 16, 2020 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

The rapporteurs are Ms. Zanchetta and Mr. Aouasti, who refer to the written report.

Mr. Speaker, colleagues, it is a good thing that the bill to combat the non-consensual distribution of sexually tinted images and recordings is put to the vote today. It is a whole mouthful. The title has also been changed, because in popular terms it is referred to as revenge pornography.

Although there were many legal problems at the beginning, they have been well discussed in the committee and we have come to a proposal that has been signed by the majority of the parties. It has become a broadly adopted proposal. That is a good thing, especially for this topic. I would also like to thank Ms. Matz for her constructive attitude and cooperation.

For our party, the need to protect victims of this phenomenon of revenge pornography is very important. Also the youthful nonsense regarding sexting is very common today, due to the rise of social media. That is also why we have supported this bill from the very beginning.

The impact is huge. If we know that 50 percent of victims later have suicidal tendencies, that especially young victims do not dare to file a complaint out of shame, that an image can continue to circulate on the internet forever if it is not removed within six hours and therefore also continues to weigh on the victims, it is really crucial that we vote today this bill to protect especially very young victims, especially girls.

This bill protects victims in various ways.

CD&V finds a number of things very important. First, the penalties are tightened when images are distributed with malicious intent and for profit. Second, when there are minors in the game, which is often the case, heavier penalties can be imposed. Thirdly, and very importantly, the provision is built into the presumption that the images were distributed without consent.

In addition, the proposal also provides that those images are taken offline as soon as possible. For this purpose, a special procedure has been developed in short-term proceedings. Distributors and intermediaries are also encouraged to take the images offline.

In this regard, I would like to make a comment. Major providers and social media such as Twitter and Facebook, often collect the burden of evidence themselves offline if they determine such facts themselves, even before anything happens. This means that the burden of proof no longer exists. I have therefore drafted a resolution to advocate agreements at European level so that the providers make the burden of proof available to the prosecutor’s office. This seems to me to be an important element in the story, which is not included in the current bill.

Finally, this bill also aims to support victims by enabling the Institute for Gender Equality to act in court. Many victims are embarrassed or do not dare to go to court themselves. When the Institute for the Equality of Women and Men can do it in their place, it is a heart under the belt.

I am convinced that I have sufficiently emphasized the added value of this bill. Thank you for the cooperation. Of course, CD&V will approve this bill.

I am not going to repeat what Ms. Van Hoof said about the bill. We are very pleased that a consensus on this has been reached across party boundaries.

The malicious dissemination of those images can have very serious consequences. We have already hammered on the minors. It’s also about images that were created in long relationships and after the relationship are made public to take revenge, to harm others. These are things that can lead to huge consequences. I am pleased that this is finally put in place.

I would like to talk about the work in the committee. Amendments and sub-amendments were submitted and discussed, on 6 February, on 14 February, on 20 February. Therefore, a coordinated text was proposed. During the voting on 10 March, amendments and sub-amendments were submitted.

At that time, the Flemish Belang abstained because it simply became a cacophony. It was no longer clear which text was proposed. It was inoperable and extremely difficult. A coordinated text would have been better at that time, but that does not mean that we have worked on this bill and submitted a number of sub-amendments. This was largely taken into account, for which I thank you.

We will, of course, support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, dear colleagues, in the time of social media where the exchanges are permanent, constant, we rely more than anything on our interlocutor to respect our privacy.

Revenge porn is a practice that consists of making public, often by revenge and in particular through social networks, sexually explicit content, without the consent of the person concerned.

The dissemination of these images is an act of violence, violence multiplied by the fact that once the machine is launched by the dissemination on social networks, it is difficult to stop it.

In April 2018, the TV channel VTM broadcasted a report with journalists who had discovered, on a forum, several thousand intimate photos and videos broadcast without any consent.

We do not want to minimise the extent of this cyber violence and its toxic consequences on the lives of victims, especially when this cyber violence is of a sexual order.

While the victim is often blamed for the dissemination of images that reveal to the world a pan of her intimate life, the PTB wants, with this bill, to reposition the author as the sole responsible for his acts and wants to actively fight against the perpetration of sexual violence against women and their continuation. In fact, we see with horror that once again, it is women who are the first victims of sexual violence online. We again denounce the domination, in our society, of patriarchal norms which impose on each of the specific roles. We note in particular that women are subject to specific standards and expectations in relation to their sexuality.

It is this stigmatisation that women experience following the dissemination of these images. We reject this stigmatisation that prevents them from being recognized for what they are, that is, only victims.

We know that because of confinement, violence against women is now on the rise. Céline Caudron, the national coordinator of Women’s Life, already highlighted this fact on April 1 last. I quote her: “We know that violence will increase and intensify. With confinement, stress will rise, tensions will arrive, and the transition will be faster toward sexual or physical violence, or even deadly violence.”

That is why, for the PTB, providing for quick and effective access to justice is essential for women victims of violence. We insist on the importance of allowing judges to order, in extreme urgency, the removal of the intimate images in question.

In the case of revenge porn, we note that because of sexist stereotypes, the victim often has to cope alone in the face of a real fighter’s journey to try to get this content removed.

Last month, Amnesty International issued another report confirming the ubiquity of sexist thinking, the same one that wrongly holds women a form of responsibility for their aggression.

In Belgium, one in two men believes that a victim may be partly responsible for the sexual violence she suffers. This answer, in addition to being completely false, is extremely worrying.

That is not all. One-third of young people surveyed by Amnesty International think it’s normal to insist on having sex. These are the elements that shape the meaning and representation of consent and will facilitate the use of revenge porn by the perpetrators of this violence.

That is why we argue that this bill must necessarily be associated with major prevention and awareness-raising campaigns on the notion of consent, as well as a consistent and substantial strengthening of the program of education to the relationship, affective and sexual life.

Consent cannot be assumed or extended. Consent must be required for all stages of the relationship. Consent must be clear and unambiguous. The victim is never responsible for the violence suffered. We wanted to remind him.

The findings are undeniable and alarming. The prevalence of sexual violence is increasing. This testifies once again to the urgency, which we have already raised in this homicide several times. Women more than ever need an action plan against violence, whose specific target they are, which is ambitious, realistic, binding and budgeted.

Mr. Speaker, before speaking briefly on the substance of the text, the report being complete, I wanted to highlight one thing that is not necessarily usual in this assembly. This is the work that was done by my colleague Mrs. Matz to bring about this bill, and the extremely constructive and collaborative nature of the work carried out in committee. This was important in order to reach a text that makes so much consensus today, and that can govern a social imperative that is now being put in place. I would like to thank Ms. Matz and my colleague for this work that was done in the committee.

Beyond that, we are intervening in a matter that is unfortunately in full development since the outbreak of this digital society. Outside this question, there is the question of consent, of which I will not even talk, but which is elementary and natural in any relationship. But even when there is consent in certain relationships, and in certain sexual relationships, one can see that after the end of a relationship, there may not be consent about the images that were taken with the initial consent of the person, and their dissemination. It may be a little complicated, but that is really the very meaning of this project.

Indeed, we are not just talking about unconsented sexual relationships which, in themselves, are a criminal offence, and which are a horror, but about what can be done after, even in a consensus framework, these images.

It is unfortunately seen that it is again women who are the main victims of this non-consensual dissemination of images. The aim of this bill was to suppress this non-consensual dissemination of images that still affects too often women, and also minors, and to repress them even harder when the person acts with a profit purpose and a bad intention.

This proposal of law of a few articles, which may seem anodine or innocent, is intended to govern a society phenomenon that is becoming increasingly widespread.

I had the opportunity to discuss this with some authorities who conducted an experiment. They went to high school classes and asked students who, among them, had experienced this sexting – we all know what sexting is – and 100% of students in the class raised their hand. This means that there is a social phenomenon related to this sexting, to this distribution, and this seems normal. This seems all the more normal as one unfortunately considers the woman or girl who is the victim of it as being, herself, the responsible for this sexting, since she would have made herself evident in naked photographs. It is intolerable!

This proposal goes precisely beyond the necessary prevention aspect that must be done in each school establishment and in partnership with other federated entities, in particular the French Community and the Flemish Community. It is today a clear message that is addressed, namely, that if the preventive aspect does not work, there will be the repressive aspect.

So this is the repressive aspect that we will be forced to vote in a few minutes or hours. I do not know how long the discussions will last.

It depends on all of you!

I will be brief.

Although it is short, this bill is important. I hope it will not be applied. We always vote for this type of bill with the hope that it will never be applied because, if it is, it is that a social misfortune has been committed. I thank you.

Mr. Speaker, dear colleagues, it is obviously in a very particular context that we are today led to vote on an important text which, for months, has been the subject of intense discussion.

It may seem ridiculous in view of what everyone has been living for weeks, but the phenomenon of spreading images with sexual connotation without the consent of the persons concerned unfortunately also causes victims.

These victims are traumatized for life by shame, ruined by guilt. They are silent and enduring, cut off from all social contacts. Harassed, they are sometimes driven to suicide.

We know that 90% of women are affected by this phenomenon.

It is insidious, subtle violence, which feeds on the advertising of its authors, cowardly, sometimes under the cover of anonymity; amplified by social networks always avid of sensationalism, shocking and degrading images.

We had to act to protect vulnerable people, often young people, and prevent these degrading images from going around the web. We had to act to remind us that it is an offence to devote ourselves, with or without evil intention, with or without economic interest, to this type of dissemination and sharing.

The task was not easy and we have, as the hearings, a collective work in committees, produced two legal formulas that can guarantee that these wicked acts will not be left unfollowed. We wanted, unlike other European states, to choose the judicial path, which seemed to us to be the most respectful of every interest present.

That of an extreme emergency referred, so-called hotel referred, which allows the appeal of the court of first instance so that it ceases within six hours the dissemination of the images; or the appeal of the Prosecutor of the King, already competent for terrorist propaganda or child pornography, so that he employs all appropriate means to prevent such dissemination. This is exactly what the victims expected of us: that the images that greatly harm them be removed as soon as possible.

In order to do this, justice can, I am sure, count on the contribution not only of broadcasting platforms, but also of operators who, from the beginning, have sought with us the most practical and most efficient possible solutions. I must therefore recall what I have repeatedly stated in the committee, namely that the responsibility for the withdrawal is cascading, and that it is the broadcaster who will be in the first instance responsible for the withdrawal, since it is he who edits the content. Then there will be the operator who will be forced to intervene only in the event that the broadcaster does not run.

From a technical point of view, the operator can not only hide an image or a video, but the entire site. Each intervening party must also receive all the technical data to be able to respond to judicial orders within six hours and to use all appropriate means for this purpose.

Victims who remain silent, often out of shame and because they feel that it is useless to denounce on the grounds that nothing would be undertaken to help them, should know that we wanted to offer them a real tool designed to prevent the circulation of degrading images, because we want the perpetrators of such acts not to remain unpunished – especially if they acted maliciously or for a profit. I frequently remind these victims that giving their consent to take photos or videos in the context of privacy does not imply that they have given their consent to their distribution. It is also important to emphasize that a minor will never be assumed to have given such an agreement.

Before concluding, I would like to thank the colleagues who have contributed constructively to the improvement of the text, the collaborators, but also the services of the House who have produced various documents corrected and translated in record times. Thanks to them, we end up with a text that will protect the victims and give them a little more dignity.

Adolescents, parents, victims, police, justice, platforms, operators, public services, politicians, we must walk in the same direction. I am talking about preventing the spread of hatred, contempt, harassment and lack of respect that these magnificent tools of sharing, social bonds and contacts between us can generate – as we still see today. It is our duty to work across multiple axes in order to drive all forms of cyberbullying and cyberhate out of the field of real and virtual life.

By requesting your vote on this text, we open the field of possible control of the internet and social networks as well as the preservation of freedom, with as corollary the respect for the fundamental rights of each and every one. By voting this proposal tonight, it is towards a more humanized society that we are moving forward. I thank you for your attention.

Mr. Speaker, dear colleagues, young people but also younger people, women but also men today see their sexual intimacy unknownly revealed on the Internet, in the sight of the general public, but also of their relatives, their mate, their classmates or their colleagues. These images taken as part of a trusting relationship with his partner then become a real nightmare that can prove perfectly destructive or even fatal for the victim.

It shows that 50% of victims have suicidal thoughts after the distribution of these images. There are also parents who deny their daughters. The victim no longer wants to go to school for no longer having to face the looks, mockings, insults, threats that continue elsewhere on social networks.

The mental, emotional, social, educational, professional and even physical ravages caused by the dissemination and recording of these sexual images without the consent of the person concerned on the Internet are today such that they deserved a response at the height of their gravity in our Criminal Code. It is also its role to express what is reproachable in our society. This role must now take into account the rise of social networks and their impact.

The confinement and social distancing that we currently know has also strengthened the role of social networks to enable our fellow citizens to keep in touch with each other for the best but also sometimes for the worst. In fact, cases of cyberbullying have literally exploded since the beginning of the confinement.

Accounts specifically dedicated to the distribution of stolen photos have even been created to display girls considered easy. Psychologists explain this by the fact that when people get bored, it takes them to harm others. This rise in cases of cyberbullying is ultimately and unfortunately not a surprise, when it is known that confinement has had the effect of increasing and aggravating violence within the family home, whether physical, psychological or sexual. Revenge porn is both psychological and sexual violence.

I would like to thank the author of the proposal for his initiative. It is indeed time to criminalize not only all forms of non-consensual dissemination of images and sex recordings but also the refusal to provide its technical assistance to the removal of these same images and recordings.

I would like to thank the colleagues who, in the light of the opinions received in the committee and the hearings conducted, worked constructively to ensure that this text is not only in accordance with the principles of criminal legality and proportionality, but also to be able to establish an effective procedure. It was absolutely necessary to avoid giving victims the false hope of being protected by a withdrawal procedure when there were no means to do so.

In the cases we are referring to here, the victim wishes above all the removal of the images and recordings broadcast in order to harm it, dirty it and destroy it. It also shows that the more the image is assaulting, the faster it will spread and the more quickly it will need to act to limit its impact. Therefore, a maximum period of six hours from the notification of the court of first instance has been provided.

This is an important legislative initiative aimed at recognizing victims through the penalization of these facts, but also to ensure their protection through an effective procedure, guaranteeing the prompt removal of disputed images and, if not, heavy criminal penalties.

To do this, a lot of work has been done in the committee, with the submission of many amendments in the light of the reflections of experts. I was pleased to present these amendments with some colleagues in the first reading and with Ms. Matz in the second reading.

The elements of the infringement could thus be clarified, as well as the sanctions provided by ensuring their proportionality as well as their dissuasive character. The withdrawal procedure could also be specified with clear roles assigned to each: court of first instance, operators, Institute for Gender Equality. Aggravating circumstances were also envisaged in the case of malicious intent, profit and in all cases where the victim is a minor.

The criminal scope of the bill has thus exceeded the scope of revenge porn that was initially targeted, since we no longer target only the images that are broadcast with an intention of revenge, but all those that would be broadcast without the consent of the victim – whether the intention is revenge, the will to damage the person’s reputation, to blackmail him or even to make money.

The phenomenon we are looking at here can therefore have dramatic consequences. It destroys victims physically and psychologically. The lawyer Maxime Töller, whom we had the opportunity to hear in the committee, also spoke of social femicide, an extreme form of harassment that is committed to permanently sweat the victim and whose victims, precisely, are 90 percent of women. This is why it was also appropriate to designate the Institute for the Equality of Women and Men as the body that would be competent to be in court, with the consent of the victim or its legal successors, of course.

So I am very happy today to be able to support this text, with a moving thought for all the victims. I truly dare to hope that the adoption of this text will give them the courage to complain, but also the courage to rebuild themselves, to regain confidence in themselves, in others, but also in our justice.

I thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I will be very brief but my group and myself find it important to associate with the thanks that have already been pronounced in this session to the colleagues who have worked and who have carried out this substantial work to enable us to succeed, as well as to the author of this bill which is a real great advance.

We know that new technologies, networks have many assets – it is practiced today – but they also have many perverse effects and can very quickly, like a dust trail, destroy forever a life, which will take years to rebuild itself – if it succeeds.

The only concept of vengeance has a disgusting character. I believe that today’s action within this parliament makes all its sense and that the victims will understand the interest of having a beautiful democracy that works and that, on such important subjects – which affect human dignity – everyone is able to agree.

This is what we need to remember, thank you.