OC you just want to ignore everything else and focus on that one sentence. The rest of that statement is:
it is still a serious violation of Jehovah’s standards. A person involved in viewing child pornography should be strongly counseled. Depending on the frequency and the extent of his viewing, he could be subject to congregation judicial action. In such cases, the Service Department may decide that branch-imposed restrictions are warranted.
Also point 13 of the Service Department Guildlines state:
13. Restrictions are imposed when (1) a congregation judicial committee determines that one guilty of child sexual abuse is repentant and will remain in the congregation, (2) one disfellowshipped for child sexual abuse is reinstated, (3) when an unbaptized publisher or a baptized member of the congregation who denies an accusation of child sexual abuse is convicted by the secular authorities, or (4) one viewed as a child molester by the community or the congregation becomes a publisher or becomes a baptized member of the congregation. In all of these situations, as long as he is viewed negatively by the victim, the victim’s family, the congregation, the elders, or the community, the branch office must impose restrictions on his activity in the congregation and in the field ministry.—Gal. 6:7.
So even though there is that statement. If viewing child pornography is illegal for a person in that country and they are convicted of it, regardless of how the congregation sees it, restrictions will still be imposed by the branch office against that person. The restrictions are also spelled out in both documents, Guildilines for Service Departments and in the Body of Elders Letter Protecting minors from abuse.