Contenido sensible
Este sitio contiene contenido sensible que incluye referencias a la violencia sexual.
Albania
Alemania
Angola
Arabia Saudita
Argelia
Argentina
Australia
Bangladés
Brasil
Burkina Faso
Camboya
Camerún
Canadá
China
Colombia
Corea del Sur
Costa de Marfil
Egipto
El Salvador
Emiratos Árabes Unidos
Estados Unidos
Etiopía
Filipinas
Francia
Ghana
Guatemala
India
Indonesia
Italia
Jamaica
Japón
Kazajistán
Kenia
Madagascar
Malasia
Marruecos
México
Mongolia
Mozambique
Nepal
Níger
Nigeria
Pakistán
Perú
Reino Unido
Rep. Dem. del Congo
Ruanda
Rumanía
Rusia
Serbia
Sri Lanka
Sudáfrica
Suecia
Tailandia
Tanzania
Türkiye
Uganda
Uzbekistán
Venezuela
Vietnam
Indicador
Laws against online child sexual violence
Laws against online childhood sexual violence
Child sexual abuse material (CSAM)
Internet service provider (ISP) duty to report
Laws against online child sexual violence
How to interpret your country's score for each sub-indicator
This indicator is composed of three sub-indicators (4.4.1–4.4.3). Use your country’s score on these to pinpoint the exact legal gaps to close.
| Indicator | What it measures | Why it matters | Score range |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4.4.1 Online grooming | Whether legislation criminalizes online grooming of children and adolescents for sexual purposes | Grooming is often the precursor to contact sexual violence — it must be clearly defined and considered a crime even if there is no intention to meet | 0–3 |
| 4.4.2 Child sexual abuse material (CSAM) | Whether legislation defines and criminalizes technology-facilitated child sexual abuse material (CSAM) offenses, including possession | Every image is a real child who has been harmed — comprehensive CSAM legislation is foundational to online safety | 0–4 |
| 4.4.3 Internet service provider (ISP) duty to report | Whether internet service providers are required to report suspected child sexual abuse material to authorities | Reporting duties make detection possible and enable rapid action to protect children and adolescents | 0–1 |
4.4.1 Online grooming (0-3)
| 0 | Legislation does not explicitly criminalize online grooming. |
| +1 | Legislation criminalizes online grooming with the intent to meet the child or adolescent. |
| +1 | Legislation criminalizes online grooming regardless of intent to meet the child. |
| +1 | Legislation provides a clear definition or description of online grooming (or an equivalent term). |
4.4.2 Child sexual abuse material (CSAM) Suggested table (0-4):
| 0 | No legislation specific to child sexual abuse material. |
| +1 | Legislation exists and criminalizes CSAM. |
| +1 | Legislation provides a definition of CSAM. |
| +1 | Legislation criminalizes technology-facilitated CSAM offenses. |
| +1 | Legislation criminalizes knowing possession of CSAM, regardless of intent to distribute. |
4.4.3 Internet Service Provider (ISP) duty to report (0–1)
| 0 | No legal requirement for ISPs to report suspected child sexual abuse material (CSAM), or no information is publicly available. |
| 1 | National legislation requires ISPs to report suspected CSAM to law enforcement or a mandated agency. |
Advocacy in action
Analysis coming soon
4.4.2. Child sexual abuse material
Criminalizing child sexual abuse material (CSAM) ensures those who facilitate its creation or circulation are held accountable and that society recognizes that the images depict harm inflicted on real children and that accessing or distributing them perpetuates abuse.
More than two-thirds of countries have legislation that clearly defines and bans CSAM, including technology-facilitated CSAM and CSAM possession with or without a plan to share it.
Fifteen countries have CSAM legislation, but need to add specificity to ensure all children are protected and perpetrators can be held accountable.
4.4.3. Internet service providers' duty to report
Ensuring Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are required to report suspected CSAM enables large-scale data collection to understand the scale of the problem, increases protections for children, allows countries to hold perpetrators accountable, and ensures tech companies do not profit from sexual violence against children.
The majority of countries (nearly two-thirds) are not yet holding ISPs accountable. These include some of the highest-income countries in Asia and Europe, as well as some of the top countries involved in CSAM distribution and hosting.
Explorador de datos
From indicators to budget lines
Use this as a guide to strengthen your advocacy requests and create targeted ‘asks’ to decision-makers within the right Ministry (for example: Foreign Affairs, Social Welfare, or Finance)
| Indicator | What it measures | Budget-line-to target | Template language |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4.4 Laws against online sexual violence (4.4.1–4.4.3) | Whether legislation addresses online grooming, child sexual abuse material (CSAM), and Internet Service Provider (ISP) reporting obligations | Ministry of Justice / Digital Affairs / Interior: online safety legislation, law enforcement cyber capacity, ISP compliance frameworks, technology tools | “Allocate [amount] for enacting and enforcing comprehensive online child safety legislation, including criminalization of online grooming, CSAM offenses, and mandatory ISP reporting, supported by [number] trained cyber investigators.” |
How to put a number on your ask
Break your ask into building blocks a Finance Ministry would recognize. Even a rough component-based estimate signals seriousness:
| Indicator | Examples of components to estimate |
|---|---|
| 4.4 Laws against online sexual violence | Online safety legislation drafting; cyber investigation unit staffing and equipment; Internet Service Provider (ISP) compliance frameworks; digital forensic tools |
Comparte tu historia
¡Comparte tu experiencia, investigación e historias de éxito utilizando el Índice en tu trabajo!
Comparte tu historia