INTERNATIONAL law does not emerge with much credit from the Gary Glitter child sex case in Vietnam.

Three years ago, in introducing the Sexual Offences Bill, Home Office Minister Hilary Benn, announced that new legislation provided an opportunity to tighten rules on sex offenders travelling abroad.

But the Glitter case suggests that further strengthening is urgently needed.

The shamed former pop star was placed on the British sexual offences register for seven years after being jailed for four months over child pornography in November 1999. And yet he was legally able to flee to Cambodia which expelled him three years later over suspected sex offences.

He ended up in Vietnam were he dodged the death sentence by paying off the families of two young girls he subjected to "sick and disgusting" sexual acts.

Yesterday, he was jailed for three years and could be free by the end of the year once parole is taken into account.

He will then be free to prey on children in whichever country the Vietnamese authorities decide to send him.

The sexual offences register was established so that offenders could be monitored in local communities. What is the point if paedophiles can simply disappear abroad?

The Sex Offences Act 2003 introduced foreign travel orders, enabling courts to ban child sex offenders from going abroad "where there is evidence that they intend to cause serious sexual harm to children in a foreign country".

It is too woolly. Paedophiles should simply have their passports confiscated, at least for the length of their term on the sex offenders' register, so children around the world can be better protected.