Abuse groups demand religious be named

SURVIVORS of child abuse have criticised a legal challenge by a religious order to prevent the Laffoy Commission from naming and shaming their members.

The commission, headed by Ms Justice Mary Laffoy, yesterday began a public hearing to decide whether some of those accused of abuse in State institutions are prejudiced by the lapse of time since the alleged incident.

Almost 2,000 complaints have been received by the commission; a number date from the 1940s but some go back even further.

There is one complaint that relates to a period between 1918 and 1925.

Frank Clarke, SC for the commission, said their concern was to what extent they were limited in the way it went about its business in cases where there was a significant delay or other factors were deemed to create prejudice.

Christine Buckley of Aislinn, the abuse support group, said the huge amount of money being spent by the religious on putting up the legal challenge was a clear indication that most of them were still in complete denial of the heinous and barbaric acts perpetrated on vulnerable children. “I cannot understand why they are continuing to deny these things happened,” she said.

Obviously, said Ms Buckley, they had huge problems with their members being named and shamed by the commission.

“If they continue to spend money on legal fees defending themselves rather than facing up to their past we will have no problem going further with this. We will have no alternative but to take our cases to the European Court of Human Rights. All of this behaviour of denial is impeding our healing process.”

Tony Treacy of the Right of Place Group said it appeared that the religious were more concerned about preserving their good name rather than owning up to a wrong done by their predecessors. “If the judgement is in favour of the religious we will have to advise survivors not to have anything more to do with the commission,” he said.

John Kelly of Irish Survivors of Child abuse accused the religious of using a cynical legal ploy to try to tie the hands of Ms Justice Laffoy.

Kevin Feeney SC, who represents the congregation of sisters who ran 26 industrial schools, said the task facing the commission was an extraordinarily difficult one. It was being asked to adjudicate on complaints that related to alleged incidents that happened over 60 years ago when the accused and the witnesses were deceased and when documentation was unavailable.

Mr Feeney said the vast majority of statements made to the commission did not involve allegations of sexual abuse. Many of the complaints relating to institutions concerned excessive use of corporal punishment, education, diet, clothing work and a lack of love and emotional support.

Mr Feeney referred to the executive summary of a similar inquiry in Queensland, Australia, published in 1999. While it concluded that many of the victims' accounts were “compelling in the extreme”, it was not able to reach a conclusion because of a lack of supporting evidence. “That is unquestionably the case in the commission's inquiry to date.”

Mr Feeney said no attempt was being made to stop people making complaints to the commission - that was one of the vital functions of the commission, but it should make sure that fair procedures were followed.

The hearing was adjourned until Monday.