We have recently learnt that the Humbert Summer School in Co. Mayo is to honour victims of clerical abuse.

The Humbert Summer School will also give commemorative awards to journalist Mary Raftery who doesn’t figure in our book, and Sean Ryan who headed the long – running inquiry into church and state run schools and reformatories who at the present is in the Comptroller and Auditor General Report 2009 in relation to its cost to the taxpayer over several years.

It appears that John Cooney, Director of Humbert Summer School said “the honour will mark contributions of the Commission, the long hard campaign of survivors to have their testimonies believed”.

We would like to point out that my wife’s testimony has been edited in the Ryan Commissions Report.

We are dismayed and appalled that the Ryan Commissions Report concerning such serious matters, some of which may contain implicit allegations of abuse, could contain so many inaccuracies and misleading passages.

It is submitted that no conclusions could safely be drawn for any purposes in relation to the aforementioned and on the material on the Ryan Commissions Report.

When one looks at the present position in relation to the State and the Religious Orders including the Redress Board, the Ryan Commission and its Report and the Labour Party’s Institutional Child Abuse Bill 2009.

It soon becomes clear that the Fianna Fail/Green Party Government who voted down the Labour Party’s Institutional Child Abuse Bill 2009 has shown it is dominated by the Civil Service, has no political imagination or courage of its own and just drifting without direction.

Furthermore, the Fianna Fail/Green Party Government and the Religious Orders and the aforementioned overlook their failure to understand that they should be supporting the Labour Party’s Institutional Child Abuse Bill 2009 on behalf of thousands of victims of institutional child abuse instead of patting each other on the back with the aforementioned awards.

The Bill sets out to deal with the following main areas.

· Expanding the definitions of ‘child’ and ‘institution’ so that no victim of abuse is denied justice through the Redress Board.

A small but substantial number of people were previously excluded from the Redress Board because of the wording in the 2002 Act. This change ensures that is no longer the case.

· The expanded definitions of ‘child’ and ‘institution’ in the Bill will necessitate a new time period for new applications to the Redress Board.

This recognises that victims of abuse who either lived abroad, or for whatever reason, were not aware of the Redress Board’s work, will have a second chance to apply. We propose that there will be a 3 year period for new applications once the Bill is passed.

· The Bill will abolish the obligation of secrecy which effectively prohibited applicants to the Redress Board from talking about their childhood and time in the Institutions. The Bill would delete the relevant section of the 2002 Act and remove the punishment of a €25,000 fine or two year jail sentence, or both.

· The Bill proposes that persons who were detained in Reformatory Schools under criminal convictions must be treated for all purposes in law as not guilty of an offence. Their records will be wiped clean.
For purposes of law, survivors must be treated as if they have never committed, or been charged with, or prosecuted for, or convicted of, or sentenced for, any offence.

· The records of the Redress Board and the Child Abuse Commission (Ryan Commission) will be preserved.
Destroying the records would be an insult to those who gave evidence of their abuse and would prevent future generations understanding what happened in Ireland. Consideration is given to the privacy of victims, and any plan to transfer or dispose of the records must first receive approval from the Houses of the Oireachtas.

· The Bill opens up the 2002 Indemnity Deal to Freedom of Information requests.
All legal privilege and confidentiality will be waived by the State if the Bill is passed. It will allow all records of the 2002 Indemnity Agreement with the 18 Religious Teaching Orders to be published in full. It guarantees that any proposed amendment to the Indemnity deal will have to be laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas and subject to its approval.

· Enables an audit of the Religious Orders’ Assets.
The Bill confers power on the Government to appoint an Auditor to examine the Financial Affairs of the 18 Religious Orders who signed the 2002 Indemnity Agreement. This will allow the government to assess the true wealth of the Religious Orders for future renegotiation of the 2002 agreement.

It’s quite clear that if there is any leading campaigner at the aforementioned awards they should include the aforementioned matters on behalf of thousands of victims of institutional child abuse during the debate which runs from 20 – 23 August 2009.

Albert King on behalf of Mary King. (victim of institutional child abuse).

 

3 Responses to “Humbert Summer School – Award to Survivors of abuse in State Institutions”

  1. Paddy says:

    John, everyone is entitled to their opinion. You’re the first person in the 20 year existence of The God Squad book and the ten year ‘existence’ of the website to find the title ‘insulting, disrespectful and childish’. Take a bow!! I’m not a journalist just for the record. Paddy.

  2. john murphy says:

    Dear Paddy, I find the title of your page The God Squad insulting, disrespectful and childish. What ever happened to real journalism?

  3. john murphy says:

    Re. Humbert Summer School

    The Labour Party’s Institutional Abuse Bill.

    The Bill sets out to deal with the following main areas.

    “Expanding the definitions of ‘child’ and ‘institution’ so that no victim of abuse is denied justice through the Redress Board.” Does this include the murder and dismemberment of unborn children as a result of legalised abortion?? I do hope that this meeting by “nothing more than a selection of ‘heretics’ is not going to be abused as well and used as an incitement to hatred of the Catholic Church.

    Mr Cooney and his bunch of progressive intellectual Catholics (his own words) have set themselves up as the defenders of the human rights of sufferers of clerical abuse but doesn’t or refuses to examine the extent of clerical abuse throughout all religions with abuse in the Anglican Church and other denominations eclipsing that of the Catholic Church. Let them also examine the various other professions such as teaching, legal etc., who,if the truth be known were also involved in what was and probably still is a very clever and secretive paedophile ring in our now ‘diseased’ country. Mr Cooney, (whose ego by the way can also be seen on a satellite image), would also have us believe that he is interested in the reform of the Catholic Church as long as Mr Cooney was in charge, this coming from a man, along with others (secularists) in the Catholic Church, would have preferred an archbishop, who was involved in the Belgian abuse scandals, as Pope instead of Pope Benedict. Now one has to question Mr Cooney’s agenda; why does he wish to break away from the, as he calls it the diktat of the Papacy? If he so wants the order of celibacy discontinued and the
    instituion of women priest then let him cross over to the Anglican Church, which seems to me to be in a worse mess than our beloved Catholic Church of whom Jesus Christ said “the gates of hell will not prevail against it.” This sure is a tough one for John and his cohorts.
    As for the abused try and find it in your heats to forgive and to reject the insignificant, material gestures of the secularists and enemies of the Church who would use you, the abused, to forward their own misguided agendas. Beware! Satan has all his toys out on the lawn at the moment.