Let justice be done for all
Before going into politics, I spent a brief period practising at the Bar. Going in and out of the Bridewell courthouse, I was often struck by the bold inscription above me: ‘Fiat Iustitia Ruat Caelum’, i.e. ‘Let Justice be Done though the Heavens Fall.’ It is an important statement of intent that should apply to every justice system and any consideration of wrongdoing and redress.
The scoping report into abuse at religious-run schools cries out for justice-though-the-Heavens-may-fall. Here we are again, wondering how men, mainly men, in religious life could have abused children, or failed to act if they found out what was going on. Here we are, wondering at ourselves for being surprised when we know that the line between good and evil passes through every human heart, and when we know that membership of the church does not abolish sin, only mediates the grace to fight and overcome it. Here we are again, listening to the media doing its job, giving a voice back to victims and asking the experts what is to be done now. Here we are again, wondering if the same media is also feasting on the misery and seizing on the opportunity to demoralise people of faith.
“This pain cannot be dealt with on the airwaves,” one leader of a religious congregation told me in a text during the week. “It is by meeting the victims, listening to their stories and being with them. But one can’t say that. Prayer and penance…”
He is right. But, beyond meeting and listening to victims, what does doing justice mean in this sad situation? I could be wrong, but here goes…
1. Facing the truth. Most Irish schools were run by the Catholic Church. That is something to be proud of. The Church was willing to provide education across all sectors of society when there was no Irish State to start it and later when the Irish State was too poor to fund it. It means however, that a large proportion of historical abuse in schools will be connected with religious or clergy. Not only that, but because religious organisations have an internal structure and line of authority abusers will have been kept within the system. There was secrecy and shame and half-talk, so people didn’t know, or know with certainty, what they needed to know. When they did suspect, it was easier to assume the best than to take action. And even when they knew, there was not a culture of sacking people whether the abuser was religious, priest or lay. (I suspect that trade unions would also have backed their members, in cases of lay abusers, making it harder to take action. We live in different times now.)
2. Treating all cases equally. This scoping report arose from the Blackrock Boys documentary but it was wrong that it dealt only with religious-run schools. Any statutory enquiry now must cover all schools, not just those run by religious—for example the vocational schools. We can’t only be interested in victims when the abuser was a religious, a priest or an employee of a Catholic school. That sets up two classes of victim. And we can’t only be interested in religious or clerical authorities when it comes to exposing past crimes. That sets up two classes of abuser. With widespread media hostility to the Catholic Church, the Government will be tempted to court the media by keeping the heat on the religious orders. Ministers may hope to escape scrutiny of, for example, Tusla’s failure to protect children in the present. People should push back against this. Let justice be done.
3. Staying independent of any State redress scheme. Christian organisations must offer assistance with the process of healing, and pay compensation as far as possible, for wrong done by their members or in their schools. They have already been doing this – and have spent millions of euro to date. The Church has also invested hugely in child protection structures in the present. Redress schemes are designed to prevent victims from going through the trauma of litigation. The downside is that the State will always be the dominant partner, it has unlimited resources compared with religious organisations and it has a public relations incentive to never-be-happy with the response of the Church. Faced with an unsympathetic and opportunistic adversary, the religious orders, and dioceses too, would do better to keep to their own system of supporting victims, and consider an independent redress mechanism for those not yet compensated. They must be painfully realistic and open about the commitments they must keep – both to their older members and their charitable activities in Ireland and abroad. They must decide what further resources they can contribute to healing-and-redress, and establish a panel of people who would take complaints, adjudicate them as fairly as possible, and offer whatever restitution is possible. The religious orders should make clear that this leaves victims free to pursue further compensation in the courts and from any Government redress fund designed to meet the State’s responsibilities.
4. Communicate, communicate. If church representatives fail to tell people about their reconciliation, compensation and child protection work to date, nobody will know, and others with a different and more cynical agenda will fill the vacuum. It is not easy for religious representatives to speak. Many are older, there is a shortage of energy and very little trust in the media. But there are still lay believers who value all that has been, and is, good about Catholic schools. And who can speak with honesty and integrity into this situation. Recruit them. Inform them. Commission them. The voice of the Church needs to be heard. Better to suffer in the arena, offering an honourable response to painful realities, than to have the world think that you have been hunkering down, keeping schtum, trying to keep the costs down – and that you don’t really care. When nothing could be further from the truth.
ends