BishopAccountability.org
	Critics of Church's Handling of Abuse Cases Need Evidence By Peter O'Callaghan The Age December 20, 2011 http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/critics-of-churchs-handling-of-abuse-cases-need-evidence-20111219-1p2hm.html Those calling for a public inquiry must show why it is necessary. As the independent commissioner for the Catholic Archdiocese of Melbourne, I have found more than 300 complaints of clerical sexual abuse established. Those people have been awarded compensation and will receive free psychological and counselling support for as long as they need it. A handful of complaints of child sexual abuse have not been established. I believe I have acted fairly, reasonably and appropriately in dealing with all complaints that I have considered. But in a letter to the state Attorney-General seeking an inquiry, extracts of which appeared in The Age in September, the Melbourne Victims Collective and their spokeswoman Helen Last assert that I have obstructed and perverted the course of justice when dealing with victims of sexual abuse. I reject those attacks on my personal and professional reputation. Before stating my position, I want to make clear that I welcome constructive criticism and if there are complainants who consider they have not been fairly or reasonably treated I invite them, or someone on their behalf, to contact me in confidence. My response will remain confidential, unless the complainant wants to publish it. In short, I am bound to confidentiality but complainants are not. Critics of church's handling of abuse cases need evidence Peter O'Callaghan December 20, 2011 Opinion Ads by Google Self Managed Super (SMSF) www.esuperfund.com.au Take Control of Your Super Special Offer Ends Soon. Apply Now! Those calling for a public inquiry must show why it is necessary. As the independent commissioner for the Catholic Archdiocese of Melbourne, I have found more than 300 complaints of clerical sexual abuse established. Those people have been awarded compensation and will receive free psychological and counselling support for as long as they need it. A handful of complaints of child sexual abuse have not been established. I believe I have acted fairly, reasonably and appropriately in dealing with all complaints that I have considered. But in a letter to the state Attorney-General seeking an inquiry, extracts of which appeared in The Age in September, the Melbourne Victims Collective and their spokeswoman Helen Last assert that I have obstructed and perverted the course of justice when dealing with victims of sexual abuse. I reject those attacks on my personal and professional reputation. Before stating my position, I want to make clear that I welcome constructive criticism and if there are complainants who consider they have not been fairly or reasonably treated I invite them, or someone on their behalf, to contact me in confidence. My response will remain confidential, unless the complainant wants to publish it. In short, I am bound to confidentiality but complainants are not. Advertisement: Story continues below Almost all complaints of child sexual abuse made to me are from adults who were abused when a child. They have lived with these complaints for decades without disclosing to anyone save perhaps a spouse or close friend. Most keenly desire confidentiality, which I undertake to maintain. I tell all complainants that they have a continuing and unfettered right to report their complaints to the police. And I encourage them to do so. However, the great majority of complaints of child sexual abuse are against priests who have been convicted or are dead. In cases where the priest is alive, some complainants, having been encouraged to do so, have reported their complaints to the police. Others have not. Reasons for not doing so vary. But the desire to maintain confidentiality and avoid the stress of court proceedings are nearly always among them. If a complaint is reported to the police, I take no further steps until that investigation and any resulting proceedings are completed. Once this has occurred I resume dealing with the complaint, and in due course the victim is compensated. In the relatively small number of cases where the victim will not go to the police and the alleged offender is alive and denies the offence, I conduct a confidential hearing. At that hearing there is senior counsel assisting the commission; the complainant is often also represented by a lawyer. And in all cases in which I have found the complaint established, the offending priest has been represented by counsel. As long ago as June 2008, the Melbourne Victims Collective made a series of highly critical allegations against the Melbourne Response and me in particular. My repeated attempts to obtain details of the cases giving rise to its criticisms have been unsuccessful. Likewise, the collective has not identified any particular person who they say has been unfairly treated. I make no comment on whether there should be a public inquiry, other than to say that if there is I will fully co-operate with it. But surely there should be some prima facie evidence that sexual abuse complaints have not been fairly, reasonably and appropriately dealt with before any inquiry is called. Because an inquiry could be expected to impact on the confidentiality that I have undertaken to complainants would be maintained, the need for one should be clearly and cogently demonstrated.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.