Possession of Extreme Pornography

Joint UK/Scottish Government Consultation:

Original Joint UK-Scotland Consultation Document: Consultation on the Possession of Extreme Pornographic Material [pdf]

UK Analysis of Consultation Responses:

UK Government Analysis of Responses: Consultation on the Possession of Extreme Pornographic Material Summary of responses and next steps [pdf]

A key document was used by the UK Government to support continuation of the bill. This was produced by academic feminist campaigners:  A rapid evidence assessment  of the evidence of harm relating to exposure to extreme pornographic material [web page index of downloadable docs]

UK Parliament Proceedings:

Extreme Porn Bill: Criminal Injustice & Immigration Bill 2nd Reading Debate (Oct 2007)

Memo to JCHR From Backlash presented to parliamentary human rights committee

Human Rights Compatibility From Backlash presented to parliamentary human rights committee

England/Wales/Northern Ireland Law and guidance

The Dangerous Pictures chapter of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 which came into force on January 26th 2009.

Government guidance [pdf] has been published to further explain what images are considered dangerous to possess.

See also CPS Extreme Pornography: Legal Guidance

Scottish Analysis of Consultation Responses:

Scottish Government Analysis of Responses: Analysis of Scottish Responses [pdf]

Published Scottish Responses: List [web page index of downloadable docs]

Results of a freedom of information request from CAAN Scotland aimed at outlining the history of the development of the extreme pornography law in Scotland: Freedom of Information Response [zip] (21 Mbytes)

Scottish Law and guidance

The bill was passed in June 2010 to become the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010 [pdf].

The Dangerous Pictures clause came into force on 28th March 2011. Public guidance has now been published by the Scottish Government

Appendix: Individual Consultation Responses

Supportive responses received:

A legal opinion on the Proposals by Rabinder Singh QC
A Commentary, Critique and Opinion from Mike

Response Savaging Proposals from WS Society of Lawyers
Response Challenging Lack of Research by Martin Barker & Ernest Mathijs
Response & critique of the Government’s proposed legislation by David M
Response from Jon F who also reports the abuse of human rights
Response from Julian Petley of Brunel University

Response from the BBC
Response from The British Psychological Society
Response from Campaign Against Censorship
Response from Channel 4 [pdf]
Response from Cyber Rights [pdf] (offsite link)
Response from Inquisition 21st Century
Response from the Institute of Ideas [pdf]
Response from the Melon Farmers
Response from the Misty Media Sex Blog
Response from MUD-UK
Response from Ofwatch
Response from Relaxed London
Response from SM Scotland [pdf]
Response from Uncharted-Worlds (offsite link)
Response from Unfettered

Response from Aaron of Backlash [doc]
Response from Bobette of Backlash [doc]
Response from budgie of Backlash [rtf]
Response from Graham of Backlash
Response from Manniq of Backlash [doc]
Response from Ms Demmie of Backlash
Response from Steve of Backlash

Response from Flogher of the BDSM community
Response from Snowdrop Explodes
Response from Tanos
Response from UKRudeGirl, Sexual Freedom Coalition [doc]

Response from a Criminologist

Response from Dark Angel
Response from David Witts [pdf]
Response from Franco
Response from Grant
Response from Ian G
Response from Michael
Response from Shaun
Response from Teddy

Rights & liberty are held in low regard in  responses received:

Response from the Association of Chief Police Officers In Scotland (with comments by IanG)
Response from CHIS, a group of children's charities
Response from Rights of Women
Response from Scottish Women's Convention [pdf]
Response from Women's National Commission [doc] (offsite link)

Other Responses Maintained by Backlash:

A good number of the remainder of the responses are maintained as pdf image files at www.backlash-uk.org.uk/responses. Many are still withheld supposedly due to references to Graham Coutts who was facing a retrial at the time.