Tech giants to give evidence to child sex abuse inquiry in secret

Tech giants Facebook, Apple, Google and Microsoft will be allowed to give evidence to child sex abuse inquiry in secret

  • Companies considering features making it easier for abuse to take place online
  • Internet giants are failing to properly tackle child sex abuse, inquiry has heard
  • They remain ‘immune from liability no matter how reckless or indifferent’ they are to the risks posed by paedophiles

Internet giants are failing to properly tackle child sex abuse and are ‘reckless or indifferent’ to the risks posed by paedophiles, an inquiry heard today. 

Leading companies have been accused of prioritising profits over the protection of children, the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) heard today.

A lawyer acting on behalf of victims abused online said some tech giants are even considering features which will ‘make it easier, not harder, for child abuse to take place online’.

He said a prospective version of the Google Chrome browser will contain end-to-end encryption making it ‘harder to block harmful content’. 

A prospective version of the Google Chrome browser will contain end-to-end encryption making it ‘harder to block harmful content’ and ‘easier, not harder, for child abuse to take place online’

How will the inquiry work? 

The inquiry will look into how the internet is used to facilitate child sexual abuse in England and Wales through acts like grooming, sharing indecent images, and live-streaming abuse. 

It aims to reduce the opportunities for abuse and the responses of internet providers, online platforms and other relevant technology companies. 

Police and Government officials as well as representatives of Facebook, Google, Apple and Microsoft are due to give evidence at public hearings from May 13 to 24.

However some hearings involving the firms will be closed sessions and not accessible to the public or press owing to ‘sensitive matters’, according to the timetable.

Lawyer William Chapman, representing three victims of online sexual abuse, told the hearing: ‘These firms bestride the world, telling us they are heroes of the technological revolution, they have amazed us with the things they can do … the result is that they have legendary wealth.

‘The ultimate question you have to ask is this: is it really beyond the wealth and wit of these technology companies to prevent and detect child sexual abuse on their platforms?

‘Or is there something incompatible with their commercial objectives and their culture that makes them bridle at the necessary steps to curb this modern scourge?’ 

Internet giants are failing to properly tackle child sex abuse and remain 'immune from liability no matter how reckless or indifferent' they are to the risks posed by paedophiles, the inquiry has heard (file photo)

Internet giants are failing to properly tackle child sex abuse and remain ‘immune from liability no matter how reckless or indifferent’ they are to the risks posed by paedophiles, the inquiry has heard (file photo) 

Andy Burrows, associate head of child safety online at the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) said: ‘It is completely absurd that just as society is demanding a safer internet, tech firms are creating services that will make it easier for children to be abused on their sites.

‘But we have seen for more than a decade that children’s safety is not top of the priority list for many social media platforms.

‘This is why statutory regulation of these companies is the only way forward, along with tough consequences imposed on the firms who fail to protect their young users.’

Children aged between 12 and 15 now spend nearly three hours per day online, according to Ofcom 2018 research, the inquiry was told.

It marks an increase on the two and a half hour’s children spent online in the regulator’s 2015 findings.

Jacqueline Carey, lead counsel to the inquiry, said the figures show ‘how easily accessible children are to those intent on causing children harm’. 

Police and Government officials as well as representatives of Facebook, Google, Apple and Microsoft are due to give evidence at public hearings

Police and Government officials as well as representatives of Facebook, Google, Apple and Microsoft are due to give evidence at public hearings

Two of the victims represented by Mr Chapman, a brother and sister who cannot be named, are not eligible for compensation because the abuse they suffered took place wholly online, the hearing was told.

Mr Chapman said: ‘We say it is equally unacceptable that victims of sexual offences committed online are not eligible for compensation in the same way that those who provide the technology that facilitates this abuse are immune from liability, no matter how reckless or indifferent to the risks to children their platforms are.’

He added: ‘We say the that the case for regulating these companies is now beyond argument. Technology can and must solve the problem that technology has created.’  

The inquiry, which is due to hear from Facebook’s global safety policy manager Julie de Bailliencourt on Tuesday, continues. 

The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) explained

Why was it set up?

After the abuse of Sir Jimmy Savile was revealed, only fully after his death in 2011, hundreds came forward to claim they were abused. It would then emerge that these attacks were in NHS hospitals, schools, children’s homes and also at the BBC – police and the CPS also made mistakes that let him abuse freely.

In 2014 Theresa May, then Home Secretary, set up the inquiry to ‘expose those failures and learn the lessons’.

How does it work?

The inquiry is looking at 13 areas – and they will be covered in the first phase of the inquiry will last around 18 months. A final report on each area are expected to be completed in around five years.

It is being run by Professor Alexis Jay, who led the inquiry into abuse in Rotherham. She will earn £185,000. She will be helped by various experts and lawyers. Victims will also be represented by a panel.

Witnesses will give evidence under oath but the panel will only return with ‘findings of fact’ not the civil or criminal liability of named individuals or organisations.

Why has it been controversial?

The Inquiry is now on its fourth chairwoman.

Dame Lowell Goddard, who was handed a package worth £500,000 including relocation from New Zealand and a £360,000 annual salary, quit suddenly last year.

It later emerged she charged taxpayers almost £6,000 to fly treasured possessions including a vase 11,400 miles across the world from New Zealand.

Sources claimed Dame Lowell, appointed by then-Home Secretary Theresa May, had lost the confidence of senior staff and members of the inquiry panel.

New chairwoman Professor Alexis Jay has already had to call in an independent legal expert to examine an alleged cover-up of sexual assault and bullying claims at its headquarters.

Baroness Butler-Sloss and Dame Fiona Woolf both stepped down from the role in 2015 after concerns about their links to the establishment. 

 

Read more at DailyMail.co.uk