Child pornography has been an ongoing battle that many children face. In dealing with the criminal offenses to what this can eradicate has changed since the R. v. Sharpe case. The legislative response to the R. v. Sharpe case depicted a negative response to what was expected from their declaration, which illustrated child pornography as undefined and not merely important to be ascribed in the Charter. The R. v. Sharpe case is highlighted to be an instrumental tool that guides the Charter on their interpretation of the defiance of freedom of expression and morality; this is highlighted in the case that resulted into a winning case that acquitted the defendant. As a result, the compliance of this case provoked an issue between the definition …show more content…
Although, privacy is important to take note on the realm of this case, there is still visual evidence that has foreseen children by exploiting them into the works. In the case, Sharpe argues that the section of the Charter that defines child pornography is too broad, with situations that bear no risk of harm to children (Davidov 2000, 9). It has been argued that because the definition of the child pornography is a narrow definition, it wasn’t enough to have the courts justify this accountability that it violates the rights of children to an extent that limits themselves even through mere images. The Criminal Code defines ‘child pornography’ in a narrow perception that is “or is depicted as being under the age of eighteen years and is engaged or is depicted as engaged in explicit sexual activity” or also “depicts the body of a child with undue emphasis on the genital or anal regions” (Macvlor 2013, 240). As subjective to this notion, the case in which there was no harm to children, the Courts have passed this