Jehovah’s Witnesses Will Finally Join Australia’s Program for Sex Abuse Victims March 6, 2021

Jehovah’s Witnesses Will Finally Join Australia’s Program for Sex Abuse Victims

The Jehovah’s Witnesses will finally join an Australian program meant to make amends for child sexual abuse… but only because they would have lost their tax exempt status if they didn’t.

They may not care about the children, but they care about their bank account, apparently.

Here’s the backstory: In 2013, the Australian government set up the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse to look into the very serious issue. Rabbis were implicated alongside Catholic priests. Secular organizations weren’t immune from wrongdoing.

One of the recommendations from that Commission was the creation of the National Redress Scheme, a formal way to literally pay back victims of child sex abuse for all they had suffered. It’s not a perfect system by any means — could anything be? — but the idea behind it was that victims could fill out paperwork explaining what they went through, officials would calculate what that trauma is worth, and victims would receive a check. Among the many criticisms was that the NRS pushed a hierarchy of abuse; penetration was deemed more damaging than any other kind of abuse, for example. (That’s a discussion for another thread.)

In order to receive any payment, though, the guilty organizations had to agree to be part of the NRS system. Those that refused to join were always going to be named and shamed. Even more, the government said that groups that chose not to join would no longer be eligible for any kind of federal funding and could even lose their non-profit status.

Back in July, six organizations were announced as having not joined the program. (One of them quickly signed up after that announcement.) These were groups that were responsible for cases of child sex abuse… but because they refused to take part in the NRS, their victims’ applications could not be processed.

One of those groups was the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

In 2016, the Royal Commission said the Witnesses did not adequately protect children from child sex abuse.

Why weren’t the Witnesses taking part in the NRS?

Jehovah’s Witnesses argued it did not have the “institutional settings” needed to be covered by the National Redress Scheme.

“Jehovah’s Witnesses understand that, to date, there have been less than 10 applicants to the redress scheme who have referred to the religion of Jehovah’s Witnesses,” the organisation’s Tom Pecipajkovski told the ABC.

Jehovah’s Witnesses have responded and will continue to respond directly to individual claims for redress in a caring, fair, and principled manner, taking into consideration the unique circumstances of each claim.

That was about as comforting as the Catholic Church saying they would handle all abuse cases internally. If you were trustworthy in the first place, we wouldn’t be in this mess.

Individual Catholic churches, by the way, joined the NRS. Even they knew this was preferable to dealing with a non-stop flurry of lawsuits.

But not the Witnesses. They believed they were above all this.

A few months ago, the government said it would prepare legislation to make good on their threats to revoke the tax exempt status of those non-participating organizations. That included the Witnesses.

And now the Witnesses have caved.

“Now that the law requires charities to join the scheme, Jehovah’s Witnesses will comply,” it said in a statement to AAP on Wednesday.

“Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that it is their responsibility before God to respect and co-operate with the authorities.”

[Said Social Services Minister Anne Ruston:] “It is disappointing survivors who have named the Jehovah’s Witnesses have been forced to have their application for redress on hold this long while the organisation has been unwilling to join.”

Like I said earlier, the Witnesses are doing this because it affects their bottom line, not because they give a damn about the children their leaders abused. It’s about damn time this happened.

(Image via Shutterstock. Large portions of this article were published earlier. Thanks to Alain for the link)

"The way republican politics are going these days, that means the winner is worse than ..."

It’s Moving Day for the Friendly ..."
"It would have been more convincing if he used then rather than than."

It’s Moving Day for the Friendly ..."

Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
error: Content is protected !!