In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration. The Council considers that the rights of the child should not simply be a paramount consideration but rather the paramount consideration, an interpretation supported by Articles 32 and 34 of the Convention which state that, Article 32 I. States Parties recognize the right of the child to be protected from economic exploitation and from performing work that is likely to be hazardous or to interfere with the child's education, or to be harmful to the child's health or physical, mental, spiritual, moral or social development. Article 34 States Parties undertake to protect the child from all forms of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse. For these purposes, States Parties shall in particular take all appropriate national, bilateral and multilateral measures to prevent: (a) The inducement or coercion of a child to engage in any unlawful sexual activity; (b) The exploitative use of children in prostitution or other unlawful sexual practices; (c) The exploitative use of children in pornographic performances and materials. There may be those who argue that freedom of expression should be paramount on the basis of a decision by the British Columbia Court of Appeal which found that a law relating to child pornography contravenes the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.1 However, the Council notes that, a. (in the words of the Court) "The law is flawed because it has the potential to penalise people for possessing and creating material that may merely be the product of imagination and not intended for distribution"; and b. The decision is currently subject to appeal. 1 R v Sharpe (BCCA 1999, 416) 4