• The Supreme Court’s historic judgment against online child sexual abuse marks a significant milestone in combating child exploitation.
• It expands the scope of criminal liability for downloading and storing Child Sexual Exploitative and Abuse Material (CSEAM), which addresses the core issue of demand for such content.
•  In January 2024, the Madras High Court ruled that merely downloading or watching child pornography was not a crime, sparking widespread concern.
• The ruling undermined the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, and could normalize the consumption of child sexual abuse material.
• The Supreme Court reversed this decision in September 2024, expanding the legal definition of child abuse and reframing the issue as a grave crime. 

Key Takeaways from the Supreme Court Judgment:

• Reframing the issue:
• The court shifted the language from “child porn” to Child Sexual Exploitative and Abuse Material (CSEAM), emphasizing the crime’s severe nature.
• Criminalization of Downloading and Storing:
• The judgment holds that merely downloading or storing such material constitutes an offense, creating a strong deterrent against the demand for child abuse content.
• Accountability of Social Media Intermediaries:
• The court mandated social media platforms to report CSEAM in real-time to law enforcement authorities, holding them accountable for content on their platforms.
• Long-term impact:
• The judgment highlighted the perpetuity of online abuse, where victims continue to suffer re-victimization as images remain available online.
• The recent Supreme Court judgment aligns with India’s commitment under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) to protect children from harm, including online sexual abuse.

Constitutional Provisions

• Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty):
• The Constitution of India guarantees the Right to Life under Article 21, which has been interpreted to include the right to live with dignity, protection from exploitation, and personal safety.
• Child sexual abuse and exploitation directly violate this fundamental right.
• Article 15(3):
• This article empowers the State to make special provisions for the protection and welfare of children.
• The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, and other child protection laws derive their legitimacy from this constitutional mandate.
• Article 39(e) and (f) (Directive Principles of State Policy):
• The State is directed to ensure that children are not abused and are provided opportunities to grow in a healthy manner.
• Article 39 emphasizes the responsibility of the State to protect children from exploitation, ensuring their rights are safeguarded.

Legal Provisions

• POCSO Act, 2012 is the cornerstone legislation that addresses child sexual abuse in India. It criminalizes various forms of sexual exploitation of children, including the use of children in pornographic content.
• The Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000 governs cybercrimes and electronic offenses, including child pornography. It complements POCSO by targeting online sexual exploitation and content distribution over digital platforms.
• Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 emphasizes child-friendly approaches and includes special provisions for children involved in or victims of crimes such as trafficking and sexual exploitation.

Concerns / Challenges

• Many social media platforms and messaging apps use end-to-end encryption, making it difficult for law enforcement agencies to monitor or intercept harmful content, including CSEAM.
• The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to create synthetic child abuse material (deepfakes) complicates detection. Distinguishing between real and AI-generated images presents significant challenges for law enforcement and forensic experts.
• CSEAM can spread quickly across multiple platforms and jurisdictions, making it challenging to track, remove, and prevent further dissemination.
• Many social media platforms are headquartered outside India, making cross-border cooperation difficult.
• The shortage of skilled personnel, including forensic experts and cybercrime investigators, hampers the effective implementation of the judgment.
• Most legal frameworks focus on prosecuting offenders, but there is insufficient attention given to the rehabilitation and psychological support of child victims.Way Forward:

• Defining Cybercrime:
• Indian laws must explicitly define cybercrime and include CSEAM under its scope as an organized crime.
• Emerging crimes such as AI-generated child abuse material should also be criminalized.
• Accountability of Social Media Platforms:
• Social media companies must be held responsible for flagging and reporting CSEAM to law enforcement in real-time.
• Forensic Lab for CSEAM:
• India should establish a forensic lab equipped with the latest technology to analyze CSEAM data and provide timely intervention.
• National Database on Sexual Offenders:
• Individuals prosecuted for downloading CSEAM should be added to the National Database on Sexual Offenders, barring them from jobs involving children.

 Global Impact and Border-less Response:

• CSEAM as a Global Industry:
  • The global CSEAM industry is worth billions, fueled by technological advancements, and requires international cooperation for dismantling.
• Global Convention:
  • A legally binding international convention is needed to streamline cooperation between governments, law enforcement, and stakeholders to combat CSEAM.
• International Database of Sex Offenders:
  • Establishing a global database would ensure better tracking and cross-border action against offenders.

This judgment sets a precedent not only for India but for global efforts in combating child exploitation. A coordinated, multi-layered approach involving legal reforms, technological advancements, and international cooperation is necessary to dismantle the CSEAM industry and protect vulnerable children worldwide.