Child porn laws impose costs on artists

http://www.iinet.net.au/customers/news/articles/1025223.html

Artists and photographers will face expensive fees to have their work classified, under reforms to NSW child pornography laws that will scrap the "artistic merit" defence.

State Attorney-General John Hatzistergos introduced the new laws on Tuesday, saying they will help authorities better distinguish child pornography from art, protect victims and make it easier for police to prosecute cases.

The legislation comes after the public furore over an exhibition in 2008 of pictures of nude children taken by artist Bill Henson, and flow from a working party examination of the state's child pornography laws and sex offences sentencing.

"Currently a clear line does not exist between child pornography and art - a situation that is not ideal for the public or the artistic community," Mr Hatzistergos said.

The laws adopt commonwealth provisions where the court looks at the artistic merit of the material when deciding whether it is child pornography, rather than relying on the defence of artistic purpose.

Mr Hatzistergos said the new laws would not apply to material that is classified.

"If (art) is classified under commonwealth legislation, then it is exempt from the reach of these particular provisions," he told reporters in Sydney on Tuesday.

The laws would not have applied to the controversial semi-naked photos of children by Mr Henson, because his work had been classified by the commonwealth.

In 2008, NSW detectives raided an inner-Sydney art gallery, seizing Mr Henson's images of naked 12 and 13-year-old girls, saying they expected to lay charges.

But the investigation collapsed and the artist was never charged.

Citing the famous photo of a naked young girl taken during a Vietnam War Napalm attack, Mr Hatzistergos said the NSW laws would get the balance right.

"That (picture) sent a very powerful message," he said.

"It's not proposed that kind of depiction will be captured by these new provisions.

"That's why we have taken the time to consult broadly with all the relevant stakeholders."

National Association for Visual Arts spokeswoman Tamara Winikoff said obtaining classifications could be expensive and time consuming but the new laws would not affect many artists.

"At the moment it's unusual for artists to seek classification because it's very rare for work to be contentious," she said.

"It usually costs $500 at least for one image, so it can become quite expensive.

"It can take a number of weeks so that can be an issue where an artist has an exhibition pending.

"If they miss the exhibition slot obviously it has economic consequences for them."

Ms Winikoff said it was a matter of personal judgment whether artists obtained classifications for their work.

She said it was important the art community worked together with authorities.

"I think in the first instance we were concerned, but in discussions with the attorney-general department ... we feel there is a balance to be found between the interest of child protection and interests of freedom of expression," she said.

"What we're currently negotiating ... is the opportunity in the first instance for art experts to be asked to provide their opinion against a set of agreed art industry criteria."

The reforms will also reduce the trauma of police, prosecutors and juries involved in child pornography cases by using random samples to represent the body of child abuse images rather than analysing every single one.

And victims in child pornography cases will be allowed to give evidence via CCTV and cross-examination by the accused will be prevented.

Vice president of the Victims of Crime Assistance League Howard Brown said the government's legislation was a balanced response to what can be a grey area.