header-logo header-logo

The politics of porn

09 August 2007 / Clare Mcglynn , Erika Rackley , Erika Rackley
Issue: 7285 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

The government should reconsider plans to criminalise the possession of adult pornography, say Professor Clare McGlynn and Dr Erika Rackley

The Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill published on 26 June 2007 includes measures to create the new criminal offence of possessing “extreme pornography”, a term which includes necrophilia, bestiality and serious or life-threatening injury. While the government claims that the measures will simply close a gap in existing legislation, they are much more significant than that. They would create the first possession offence in respect of adult pornography anywhere in Europe. This may sound dramatic, but that’s because it is. Creating such an offence, thereby criminalising individuals sitting at home if they download certain materials, requires careful justification.

While we broadly support the measures, we have reservations about the nature of the justifications offered by the government and the absence of sufficient defences. Further, while the measures have been criticised for being over-broad, we are concerned that in respect of what we perceive to be the most harmful form of extreme

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hill Dickinson—Paul Matthews, Liz Graham & Sarah Pace

Hill Dickinson—Paul Matthews, Liz Graham & Sarah Pace

Leeds office strengthened with triple partner hire

Clarke Willmott—Oksana Howard

Clarke Willmott—Oksana Howard

Corporate lawyer joins as partner in London office

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll