The law and the Lolita predator

It is Hong Kong's version of the Mary Kay LeTourneau case, minus the media circus. The storyline combines a parent's worst fears and what censors have long warned about the dangers of the Internet. A 14-year-old boy joins an Internet youth chat-line and starts communicating with strangers, assuming participants are around his age. In cyberspace, he makes friends with another 'child'. But his 'playmate' is an adult, a woman who quickly masterminds an elaborate seduction. As the relationship spirals out of control, the boy's parents try to separate the couple. Luckily, the boy does not elope, like the 35-year-old American elementary school teacher Mary LeTourneau and her lover, also aged 14. He just stops contacting the woman from home, sending her e-mail from a computer at school instead. Police are alerted and the woman flees Hong Kong, ending her relationship with the boy but not the investigation. Under current laws, prosecution is difficult once a suspected paedophile leaves the SAR. This case is further complicated because the alleged offender is a woman. Superintendent Philip Bouttle of the Police's Child Protection Policy Unit says the case highlights not only the inherent weakness in the law but also dangers posed by the Internet. 'The potential for paedophilia to become a serious problem in Hong Kong is there, especially with the proliferation of child pornography on the Net,' Mr Bouttle says, referring to non-incest-related sex with minors. 'We certainly need tougher laws in this regard.' The Social Welfare Department currently has 242 active cases of sexual child abuse. Proposed changes to the law include making possession of child pornography a crime as well as enabling extraterritorial jurisdiction to prosecute sex tourists who commit crimes overseas. Some critics, both local and overseas, warn against the 'hysteria' over paedophilia. Moreover, there has been no clear consensus, even among advocates of tougher laws, about how best to legislate to protect our children. Some, like Citizens Party chairman Christine Loh Kung-wai, believe that paedophile activities are more extensive in Hong Kong than are reported. She says the overseas extension of anti-paedophile laws is necessary because Hong Kong is used as a base for international sex tourists. 'There is little doubt that Hong Kong is home to paedophiles,' she said in a paper to the Security Bureau. 'The Police's Child Protection Policy Unit has details of known expatriate paedophiles using Hong Kong as their base for regional activities.' Mr Bouttle declines to comment on police surveillance of paedophiles in Hong Kong. A supporter of Ms Loh's proposals, he nevertheless believes Hong Kong paedophiles act mostly on their own; at most they make casual acquaintances with a few like-minded people. There is no evidence to suggest an underground network in the SAR, Mr Bouttle says. Police records show six people have been prosecuted for distributing and selling child pornography in the past three years. Another 10 were found in possession of such material but none was brought to court. The Security Bureau says it is studying the new law proposals, but it is understood to be reluctant about making possession a crime. Even director of Against Child Abuse, Priscilla Lui Tsang Sun-kai, warns that such laws taken to extremes could infringe on basic freedom. She recommends longer jail terms for offenders rather than redefining a new category of crime such as possession. 'I have some reservations. There are a lot of grey areas,' she says. 'For example, would counsellors and researchers be prosecuted if they collected child pornography in their line of work under the new proposal?' While apologists for child pornography and prostitution are hard to find, a few writers and scholars have cast doubt about our attitude towards paedophiles. Hong Kong University Professor of Psychiatry Ng Man-lun says little is known scientifically about the nature of paedophiles but many people have a 'natural' tendency to consider young people as sexual partners. 'Unlike homosexuality, there has been no extensive research on paedophilia. Like incest and bestiality, it is treated as a pathological condition for mainly historical reasons. Homosexuality used to be treated as a pathology but research helped to change that. 'Perhaps future research will show paedophilia is not pathological after all.' The Health Department classifies paedophilia as a mental disorder. It is defined as 'repetitive, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviour involving sexual activity with a pre-pubescent child or children [generally aged 13 years or younger]. The majority of child molestation involves genital fondling or oral sex. The frequency of the paedophiliac act fluctuates but can be associated with stress'. But since 1994, the American Psychiatric Association has modified its definition of paedophilia, along with sadism, voyeurism and exhibitionism. These are defined as pathologies or mental disorders only if they 'cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning'. In other words, such practices may be illegal, but not necessarily pathological. The arguments against excessive laws and public hysteria usually target two issues. Critics say the severity of the punishment does not fit the more or less benign nature of the crime, and the child is not necessarily harmed and may even benefit from sex with an experienced and loving adult. But the positive effects of paedophilia (literally the erotic love of children) have yet to be proved, whereas its damaging results have been amply demonstrated and documented in psychological, medical and social-scientific literature, and in the autobiographical accounts of former victims. Not surprisingly, Mrs Lui is infuriated by 'pro-paedophile' arguments. 'All these are just excuses, repackaged in scholarly phrases,' she says. 'Sex education is essential, but you don't teach a child about sex by putting your finger into her vagina.' Whereas liberals on the issue are usually motivated by a desire to justify their sexual inclination, child-protection advocates, even if misguided, at least have the interests of children at heart.