Child Abuse Commission Must Be Carefully Focused

The Australian
November 19, 2012

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/editorials/child-abuse-commission-must-be-carefully-focused/story-e6frg71x-1226519884352

A WEEK after Julia Gillard announced a royal commission into child sexual abuse, the challenge of satisfying community expectations is growing harder by the day. The government was right to respond to community concerns, but a nagging question still remains: what is the commission designed to do?

In the absence of a carefully defined brief, the commission - which is yet to be established - is being wildly misconstrued by politicians, lawyers and children's advocates. Australians have overwhelmingly welcomed the commission, and so does The Australian. From the outset, however, we argued that the terms of reference and timetable for the commission will be critical. First and foremost, the government must be clear about what it wants from the inquiry. Should it be an investigative commission to uncover new cases of abuse and lead to police action or is that a job for another body? Should it have a therapeutic purpose, offering a forum for victims of child abuse to tell their stories? Or should it concentrate firmly on institutional failings and look at regulations, practices and procedures that could be put in place to help ensure that such abuse of children is not repeated?

Several lawyers have seized on the commission as an opportunity sign up new clients and to make money from it. This presents a risk that the commission could be turned into a legal circus. As reported in The Australian yesterday, at least one law firm is spruiking its services, asking victims of child sexual abuse to come forward so that they may have a "claim" to make to the commission once it is up and running. But as yet there is no procedure for hearing or investigating such claims, let alone any discussion of paying compensation. In addition, a number of victims' advocacy groups have been contacted about new claims of abuse. Other well-meaning advocacy and victim support groups are recording a sharp increase in inquiries made to their organisations. The inflated expectations may be impossible to meet.

The Prime Minister's statement last week announcing the commission confused matters further with its reference to the investigation of victims' claims. As The Australian's Chris Merritt notes, the commission is unlikely to have the authority or resources to fully investigate crimes. It would also be unwise to treat it as a clearing house for compensation claims. The commission's authority is limited given several states have ruled out forming a joint federal-state commission.

The government must take its time to get the terms of reference right. It needs to consult widely and to consider what the purpose of the commission is and what it hopes to achieve. The release of a consultation paper yesterday is a start. The one week allocated for submissions to be received, however, only highlights the haste in which this commission is being established. The failure to think through the commission's terms of reference before it was announced has left lawyers, victims and their advocates at cross-purposes. Public support for the commission could turn sour. A commission that fails to meet community expectations would only compound the injustice done to those it is meant to support.