1. National Reporting Survey – response analysis

2. The country commitment
Preventing and tackling Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse A Model National Response
At the core of the WePROTECT Global Alliance strategy is the need to establish and develop a coordinated national response to online child sexual exploitation, guided by the WePROTECT Global Alliance Model National Response. This sets out what countries need to do to: enhance efforts to identify and provide support to victims, identify and prosecute offenders, increase public awareness about the online risks, and reduce as much as possible the availability of child sexual abuse material online.
Countries that chose to join the WePROTECT Global Alliance and sign-up to the initiative’s Statements of Action (SoA) are demonstrating a high-profile statement of their intention to tackle this heinous and borderless crime. The initiative’s SoA detail how a country can take steps to combat online CSE in line with the Model National Response. The SoA also include a bi-annual duty for countries to report on progress, via the National Reporting Survey.
At the core of the WePROTECT Global Alliance is the need to establish and develop a coordinated national response to online child sexual exploitation, guided by the WePROTECT Global Alliance Model National Response. This sets out what countries need to do to:
Enhance efforts to identify victims and ensure that victims receive the necessary assistance, support and protection;
Enhance efforts to investigate cases of online child sexual exploitation and to identify and prosecute offenders;
Enhance efforts to increase public awareness of the risks posed by children's activities online, including grooming and self-production of images that results in the production of new child sexual abuse material that may be distributed online; and
Reduce as much as possible the availability of child sexual abuse material online and reduce as much as possible the re-victimization of children whose sexual abuse is depicted.

3. The National Reporting Survey
In November 2017we wrote out to our member countries for the first time to seek information about the progress countries have made against their commitments to take action to combat child sexual exploitation online, via the National Reporting Survey.
The responses we received demonstrated a strong level of engagement with the issue of online child sexual exploitation, and provided significant insights into how governments have approached this crime. This presentation includes examples taken directly from governments’ responses to the Survey.
It is our ambition to use the information we receive via the National Reporting Surveys to highlight achievements, share best practice and identify common barriers to planning and implementing a coordinated and multi-stakeholder national response to online child sexual exploitation, guided by the Model National Response.
The analysis of this report is based on the responses received in 2017, and the findings will contribute towards the WePROTECT Global Alliance’s future strategic priorities for supporting national action.

4. Policy and Governance Policy and Governance Example from the Survey:
Leadership:
An accountable National Governance and Oversight Committee 1
Research, Analysis and Monitoring:
National situational analysis of CSEA risk and response; measurements/indicators 2 3
Legislation:
Comprehensive and effective legal framework to investigate offenders and ensure protection for victims
Example from the Survey:
New Zealand operates a multi-agency approach across government and law enforcement, having established a new initiative in 2016 to coordinate efforts between the Department of Internal Affairs, the New Zealand Customs Services and the police to tackle online CSEA.
New Zealand’s Harmful Digital Communications Act, 2015 also provides an effective means to provide redress for victims of online CSEA.
Nearly all respondents cited the importance of joined-up multi-agency working, and had either a dedicated body responsible for coordinating multi-agency efforts to tackle online CSEA or a dedicated National task force to lead on the government’s response.
There appeared to be a general gap in terms of national and regional level research and evidence on the threat of online CSEA and country-level vulnerability. We will help countries address this with the WePROTECT Global Alliance Global Threat Assessment.
All respondents had, or were developing national legal frameworks with relevant legislation to criminalise online CSEA, which resulted in some differences with terminology related to online CSEA. Some countries had also signed up to existing international standards (including the EU Convention & UNDOC Protocol) to either complement national frameworks or use as a basis for country-level commitment.

5. Criminal Justice Criminal Justice Example from the Survey:
Dedicated Law Enforcement:
National remit; trained officers; proactive and reactive investigations; victim-focused; international cooperation
Judiciary and Prosecutors:
Trained; victim-focused 4 5
Offender Management Process:
Prevent re-offending of those in the criminal justice system nationally and internationally 6
Access to Image Databases:
National database; link to Interpol database (ICSE) 7
Example from the Survey:
Greece has established a specific department of the Hellenic Police force to deal with cases of online CSEA, called the ‘Online Child Protection of Minors and Digital Investigations’ unit. This department is responsible for investigations and prosecuting perpetrators.
The Department has access to Interpol’s International Child Sexual Exploitation (ICSE) database and officers using it are specially trained.
Nearly all respondents have a dedicated law enforcement function or were in the process of developing one, with specialist online CSEA training noted consistently as an important factor to enable law enforcement to respond effectively to reports of online CSEA.  
Most respondents recognised the importance of a victim and child focused judicial process to minimise secondary trauma, but there appeared to be a general gap regarding support to law enforcement dealing with online CSEA cases and reports.
Whilst offender management was included in most responses as part of the judiciary process, only a few included references to rehabilitation programmes for offenders. Some respondents had developed a sex offender register which was used to help prevent opportunities for re-offending.
Most correspondents had either a national database and/or access to Interpol’s ICSE database. The few that did not had taken steps to develop agreements with linked organisations such as NCMEC and the IWF to support the removal of online CSEA material. However, some respondents also highlighted a lack of technological capabilities to track/identify offenders.

6. Victim Victim Example from the Survey:8
End to End Support:
Integrated services provided during investigation, prosecution and after-care 9
Child Protection Workforce:
Trained, coordinated and available to provide victim support 10
Child Helpline:
Victim reporting and support; referrals to services for ongoing assistance 11
Compensation, remedies and complaints arrangements:
Accessible procedures
Example from the Survey:
‘Turkey has implemented child friendly criminal proceedings by ensuring victims of online child sexual exploitation are interviewed in suitable environments, such as Forensic Interview Rooms with specialist trained staff to prevent secondary victimisation.
In addition to this, a new law being introduced on Victims’ Rights will legislate the provision of special support measures for victims of online CSEA’
Most respondents had established mechanisms with suitably trained staff to provide 24/7 support to victims of OCSEA, with some ensuring that support was available not just throughout the judicial process, but after. Many appeared to collaborate effectively with related Civil Society Organisations to build child-friendly victim support offers. A few appeared to have a tiered support offer with more serious cases able to access emergency support services.
Most respondents recognised the need to provide psychological support and social care to victims, with a few extending this offer to family members of the victims. Some had also included statutory provision for victim compensation.
Most respondents recognised the importance of a victim reporting mechanism and had either a dedicated helpline for victims, or promoted helplines available via in-country Civil Society Organisations.

7. Societal Societal Example from the Survey:
CSEA Hotline:
Mechanism for reporting online CSEA content; link to law enforcement and Internet service providers 12
Education Programme:
For: children/young people; parents/carers; teachers; practitioners; faith representatives 13
Child Participation:
Children and young people have a voice in the development of policy and practice
Offender Support Systems:
Medical, psychological, self-help, awareness. 14 15
Example from the Survey:
Namibia has recently launched an online national reporting portal with support from the Internet Watch Foundation.
To promote the new reporting mechanism, Namibia has established close working relationships with Unicef and a local Lifeline/Childline civil society organisation to deliver out-reach campaigns in schools. The campaign material will be developed by children for children.
Most respondents had a dedicated hotline to receive reports of online CSEA, accompanied by online reporting portals and in-person referral services. The few that did not have a dedicated hotline cited operational reporting services offered by in-country Civil Society Organisations.
Most respondents provided information about a range of educational and outreach initiatives, including national level seminars for law enforcement and the media, to local level educational programmes for schools, parents and children. However, few detailed child participation in the development of educational materials and government policy as a key factor in understanding the threat and impact of online CSEA.
In general there appeared to be a gap in information provided on offender support systems, but few did recognise the need to develop offender support provisions to prevent reoffending. Some had developed automatic warnings generated to users attempting to view online CSEA material, which included links redirecting potential offenders to CSOs offering support services.

8. Industry Industry Example from the Survey:
Takedown Procedures:
Local removal and blocking of online CSEA content 16 17
CSEA Reporting:
Statutory protections that would allow industry to fully and effectively report CSEA, including the transmission of content, to law enforcement or another designated agency 18
Innovative Solution Development:
Industry engagement to help address local CSEA issues
Corporate Social Responsibility:
Effective child-focused programme 19
Example from the Survey:
Costa Rica has established a working alliance with Facebook and other internet platforms to enable the removal of online content considered to be harmful to children.
Costa Rica also engages with local telephone companies to consider the issue of online CSEA and ensure industry is aware of the threat.
Nearly all respondents recognised the need to engage industry with the issue of online CSEA and develop solutions to hosting harmful material online.
Some respondents had developed filters to block online CSEA material which were offered to in-country Internet Service Providers (ISPs), whereas others had established public/private sector agreements, protocols or partnerships to notify in-country ISPs to block sites containing online CSEA material. However, there appeared to be a general feeling that government lacked the mechanisms to drive industry to take preventative and remedial action against platforms hosting online CSEA material, particularly in cases where the material is hosted on platforms being operated in other countries.
Most takedown procedures relied on strong networks with the private sector and tended to avoid statutory process to drive industry action and compliance at the national level.
Most respondents had set up online reporting portals, which some had developed in collaboration with Civil Society Organisations that had the relevant expertise (including IWF and InHOPE).

9. Media and Communications20
Ethical and Informed Media Reporting:
Enable awareness and accurate understanding of problem 21
Universal Terminology:
Guidelines and application
Example from the Survey:
Japan has used evidence gathered from an in-country analysis of child victimisation, through child prostitution and child pornography to develop public awareness-raising campaigns to prevent further victimisation. These messages will be conveyed via the Government website and communicated more broadly via the government’s public relations. Japan will also work with the private sector to encourage safer internet use with help and advice.
Almost all respondents recognised the need to engage the media with the issue of online CSEA as a means of reaching and engaging the wider community with the threat from online criminality. Most had established working relationships with media outlets to ensure delivery of ethical and informed reporting of CSEA issues, and placing the welfare of the victim first.
Nearly half of respondents had developed a type of communications framework or agreed standards and protocols for media messaging related to online CSEA. Some had even incorporated international standards into their national framework.
Most respondents had also developed strong relationships with the private sector, leveraging the reach and community of in-country and international Civil Society Organisations to deliver and amplify key messages contained in reports of CSEA.

10. How can the WePROTECT Global Alliance help?
Preventing and tackling Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse
Our commitment to work with partners to build global capacity and capability
The National Reporting Survey asked countries to share their ideas about how the WePROTECT Global Alliance could best support them. Respondents told us that they would like us to:
Support the development of international standards for each MNR capability to facilitate international consistency in approaches to combating online CSEA
Support in raising awareness of the developing nature of the threat internationally to help enable governments to develop up-to-date policies
Guidance and the sharing of best practice for countries on engaging industry and internet service providers to take action to combat online CSEA
Supporting the provision and availability of finances to enable the mobilisation of resources against online CSEA
Facilitating multi-stakeholder discussions on emerging issues such as live streaming
WePROTECT Global Alliance will help by:
Advising the EVAC Fund to prioritise funding for activities and projects seeking to develop international standards for an MNR capability or capabilities
Elevating the issue of online CSEA to the international political arena and hosting global events to galvanise political will to act against online CSEA
Developing the Model National Response and Global Threat Assessment to support countries and organisations to develop effective responses to combat online CSEA
Building an archive of best practice and guidance from across the world to share with the international community to support wider efforts to tackle online CSEA
Engage with industry on the new and emerging threat of online CSEA to encourage innovative and dynamic solutions
Provide a platform for multi-stakeholder engagement with the issue of online CSEA