Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Arrest and tax those who would cover-up child abuse

By Max Wallace - posted Friday, 17 December 2010


In a case like this, a bishop should be arrested, charged and face gaol. Until that happens government andthe law is sending a signal to bishops and others in similar positions of authority, be they religious or secular, that to conceal a crime in order to protect the reputation of the charitable institution is perfectly acceptable.

The phrase that immediately springs to mind is that bishops and others in these situations are "perverting the course of justice". But this crime does not adequately cover the situation. Perverting the course of justice entails only

  • intimidating a case witness or juror;
  • threatening a judge;
  • disposing of, or fabricating, evidence.
Advertisement

Another possibility is "accessory after the fact." This crime involves a person who has knowledge of a particular offence having been committed, harbouring or giving aid to the person who has committed the offence. But an abuser would have to be convicted first, and his protector would have to have some intention to allow his abuse to continue. So that approach does not work either.

The only recourse in law as it stands is mandatory reporting requirements for suspected cases of child abuse. Guess what? It is only in South Australia, thanks to Senator Xenophon, that ministers of religion and employees or volunteers in religious organisations are required to report abuse - but disclosures of abuse made within the confessional are excepted. The Northern Territory goes further: it mandates every citizen to report abuse.

So why haven't other states and the ACT legislated to follow South Australia's lead? If ever there was an example of politicians' fear of religious backlash, this is it. The welfare of abused children is sacrificed on the altar of political expediency.

Then there is the question of whether a charitable institution should lose its tax-exempt status when it is discovered their personnel have been involved in a criminal cover-up. The question arose at this year's Senate inquiry into whether the law defining charity should be amended to recognise that if a charitable institution does something that was not a benefit to the public, it should lose its tax-exempt status.

The inquiry was prompted by Senator Xenophon's concerns about the behaviour of members of the Church of Scientology. This church had lost its charitable status in Britain when their Charities Commission decided that the church did not provide a public benefit. The idea was that Australian law could be amended to bring the British idea into play here.

The Catholic Church realised that laws apply to all and that the significant amount of child abuse which has been proven to have occurred in its ranks could also fall under the category of not being a public benefit. Their institutions' tax-exempt status could be vulnerable.

Advertisement

On 29 June 2010 Father Brian Lucas, a lawyer, and now general-secretary of the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference, gave evidence on behalf of the church. On that day Senator Xenophon, also a lawyer, had his De Valera moment.

Eamon De Valera was the cerebral and very patriotic Catholic activist who fought for the liberation of Ireland from British rule. He subsequently became Ireland's second prime minister and first president. In 1921, unable to successfully counter Irish guerrilla warfare, the British decided to negotiate. The British Prime Minister, Lloyd George, then came face to face with de Valera. He described negotiations with De Valera as "trying to pick up mercury with a fork."

So it was for Senator Xenophon. He asked Brian Lucas "what happens in circumstances where there are allegations or evidence of child abuse, the hierarchy of the organisation becomes aware of that and they do not act appropriately - they either do not report it to the authorities which would be an offence in terms of the requirement to notify that in most states, or they actually cover it up?" (This question was not strictly accurate in terms of religious organisations as only SA and the NT have mandated reporting as noted above.)

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

26 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Max Wallace is vice-president of the Rationalists Assn of NSW and a council member of the New Zealand Assn of Rationalists and Humanists.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Max Wallace

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 26 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy