Keeping up with the times
Mobile phones, social networking sites, email, instant messages and the internet have democratised and socialised information, but these innovations have also enabled the proliferation of image-based sexual abuse. Noticing an uptick in cyber bullying, legislators passed the Protection from Harassment Act, allowing victims to get restraining orders without breaking the bank. It came into force in 2013. Had the legislation been around when Potgieter needed protection against her exfiancé, there would have been no need to pay R250 000 in legal fees.
With the intention of regulating online content and curbing cybercrime, the government has drafted two new Bills, the Films and Publications Amendment Bill and the Cybercrimes and Cybersecurity Bill, with provisions criminalising the nonconsensual dissemination of intimate images. A perpetrator, if found guilty, could serve up to three years behind bars or face a hefty fine, or both.
In August last year, Sadleir and Winks addressed parliamentarians who were holding public hearings on one of the Bills. In her presentation, Sadleir included excerpts from the desperate requests for help she received from victims across the country. “I’ve been blackmailed by someone on Facebook,” one read. “Last night my 13-year-old daughter broke down and told us she had fallen prey to a sexual predator via Instagram and Snapchat,” said another.
Several months after Sadleir briefed the MPs, she told the M&G what she feared might happen. “We’re going to get this law, we’re going to go to the police, try and lay a complaint and the policemen are going to look at us like we’re idiots and not do anything.”
Several countries have already changed their laws. But drafting legislation to regulate the internet can be a slippery slope, which is why feminists are worried that if there are no laws in place to uphold rights to privacy and sexual freedom, governments may become preoccupied with trying to control women’s bodies and their sexual expression. Members of Parliament have to strike a balance between protecting human rights and keeping the internet accessible. Proposals to regulate it have ignited opposition from transparency and free speech groups.
Criminalising behaviour gives “a very clear moral indication” that something is wrong, said Vetten. But in the same breath she said the law could be a “blunt instrument”, so legislating something is never the total solution. Some people might find it difficult to accept that a person should go to jail for sharing a photo.
“Maybe we need a broader discussion around the ethics of what we do with images, [because] in the end it’s a bit like guns,” said Vetten. “You can train people to use guns, you can put in place gun control and you can criminalise things done with guns, but it does not stop people from murdering each other,” Vetten said.
Education becomes a vital factor — it involves teaching people from an early age about the importance of consent, the value of privacy and what constitutes a criminal offence. It is an essential tool that could influence behaviour later on in life.
Would it have made the person who posted nude photographs of Potgieter think twice? Maybe.