Members of the Bundestag recently voted to downgrade the possession of child pornography from a felony crime to a misdemeanour. As such, minimum sentences for both the possession and distribution of child abuse material will be reduced in Germany. 

The move has been seen as contentious for several reasons and arguably sets a concerning precedent for the wider European legal community.

Last month, a proposed amendment to section 184b of the German Criminal Code was voted through the Bundestag. Section 184b was initially introduced in March 2021 in order to increase the range of sentences for the possession of child abuse material. Previously, the minimum sentence for both child abuse offences and possession of child pornography were set at one year.

The new legislation seeks to reduce these minimum sentences to six months and three months respectively.

There are several reasons for the downgrading of the crime. In the age of the internet, Germany has discovered that an increasing number of offenders are themselves juveniles. As a result, juvenile offenders have been caught up in the German federal court system for offences which are at the lower end of the penalty scale. 

Moreover, there has been a related concern that parents and teachers could be prosecuted for downloading content in order to pass on to law enforcement. Or alternatively, that people may unwittingly come to possess content through the automatic downloads feature on many messaging apps.

Now, at first glance this may seem sensible. The European Digital Media Observatory has been keen to point out that Germany has simply amended its laws to ‘make them more flexible’. They argue that the modification reduces minimum sentences but ‘does maintain severe penalties for serious offences’. 

Yet the main issue at hand is that Germany has in fact effectively introduced a wholesale reduction in the penalties associated with the distribution, possession, and acquisition of child sexual abuse materials. 

What seems peculiar here is that instead of codifying exceptions into existing legislation, the bill has rather downgraded possession altogether. As the CDU points out ‘even if the increase in the penalty range under Section 184b of the Criminal Code […] has led to practical problems in certain cases, a blanket reduction in the penalty range is the wrong solution’. Instead, ‘a change should be limited to the problem cases and solve them effectively’.

In other words, if the Bundestag wanted to provide legal pathways to prevent those innocently reported to the authorities or to create more lenient laws in the case of minors, it should have done so. 

This serves to highlight is the extreme dangers of well-meaning but careless liberalisation

Now of course the possession of child abuse materials has not been legalised, as some outlets have reported. However, it is certainly arguable that the reduction in sentences will mean that criminals convicted of possessing such material will effectively ‘get away with it’ under new legislation.

While German lawmakers have said that nothing will change in terms of the harsh penalties for child pornography offences, in reality, it is doubtful whether this will be the case. For example, we know that when the penalty range of a crime is reduced, the penalties imposed in practice also tend to decrease. 

The numbers of children involved in online sexual exploitation globally are absolutely staggering. Recent figures from the IWF show 300 million children every year being the victims of online sexual abuse. This equates to one in eight children globally. In the face of such figures, the blanket downgrading of the crime in Germany feels unsatisfying. 

Gender critical feminists have long since argued that the liberalisation of consent may have severe unintended consequences. Until now, this was one of the most contentious claims put forward by the gender critical movement. However, there are legitimate reasons for thinking this might be contributing to what is happening in Germany. 

The first is the fact that several notorious ‘pro-Paedophile’ activist groups in Germany have celebrated the downgrading of this law. They argue that it is a positive move and a significant step towards normalising so-called ‘pedosexuals’. 

Now this could just be an unfortunate coincidence. The leader of one prominent ‘pro-Paedophile’ group Dieter Gieseking has himself been convicted of possessing child abuse material and imprisoned multiple times. Gieseking has been lobbying the Bundestag for several years both to lower the age of consent and legalise child pornography. It is obviously within his interests that the minimum sentences for the possession of child abuse material be reduced. 

Second, is the unfortunate fact that in 2021, after years of review, the Bundestag appears to have accepted a petition drafted by Giesking and members of ‘K13’ regarding children’s rights. 

The petition in question asserted that children ‘have the right to have a say in all matters that affect their emotional, mental and physical well-being’ and the right to the ‘free development of their personality’. Its acceptance was celebrated by Giesking on the website he shares with his followers.

Now it seems probable that his proposals were mistakenly grouped together with other petitions from legitimate children’s rights groups. But it certainly shows an appalling lack of due diligence on the part of German lawmakers. 

What this serves to highlight is the extreme dangers of well-meaning but careless liberalisation. The vultures are circling.