| 1.1 |
The Cumberlege Commission Report 2007, ‘Safeguarding with Confidence’, considered the procedure to be adopted when criminal investigations or proceedings against an alleged abuser, who is an adult acting in some capacity within any parish, congregation or other setting within the Catholic Church in England and Wales, results in either an acquittal or a decision not to prosecute and there remains a concern. |
| 1.2 |
The criminal investigations or proceedings will have been in relation to allegations or concerns that the individual, acting in some capacity within any parish, congregation or other setting within the Church, was involved in abuse of a child, young person or vulnerable adult, wherever that abuse occurred or in whatever context (i).
i) Abuse in this context includes any actions which fall within the definition of abuse as set out in Key Terms and Definitions, Definitions, Terminology and Key Roles Procedure,” of the National Safeguarding Procedures of the Catholic Church in England and Wales. |
| 1.3 |
It also considered the proper procedure for an internal enquiry of allegedly inappropriate conduct which does not amount to a crime, but where the position of an accused person within the Church has to be reviewed. |
| 1.4 |
Following an initial assessment by the appropriate officer (AO) (ii) and where an allegation remains which requires further enquiry, paragraph 4.48 recommended that the AO on behalf of a Diocesan/Religious Commission, ‘should appoint an independent investigator – independent of the diocese or religious congregation - to carry out such enquiries as are appropriate, seeking assistance from the statutory agencies where they hold information, interviewing witnesses, the victim(s)/complainants, the accused and others who can provide evidence as to the alleged incidents or other relevant information’. Paragraphs 4.49 and 4.50 dealt with some of the detail of this recommendation. ii) Appropriate Officer (AO): in a Diocese this would be the Safeguarding Co-ordinator or Safeguarding Officer. In a Religious Congregation this would be the Religious Safeguarding Representative, supported by the Safeguarding Co-ordinator. |
| 1.5 |
The proposal was encapsulated in Recommendations 45 and 46. |
| 1.6 |
These recommendations were accepted by the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales and the Conference of Religious in April 2008. |
| 2.1 |
This protocol applies in circumstances where:
- The allegations have been investigated by the Police, but no charges have been pressed; or
- The accused person has been acquitted of criminal charges; or
- The allegations are not such as to necessitate a Police investigation.
|
| 2.2 |
In all cases the allegation and circumstances are such that, in the view of the Diocesan/Religious Safeguarding Commission, there remain concerns regarding the accused person’s conduct with children and vulnerable adults within the Church which require an internal consideration of risk. |
| 2.3 |
Where an allegation concerns behaviour which may be subject to canonical penalties, the Bishop/Congregational Leader should ensure that the appropriate decrees are issued at the start and at the conclusion of the preliminary enquiry, so that this enquiry can be considered as the “preliminary investigation” required by the canonical penal process in canons 1717-1719 or, in the case of a religious, the investigation required in canon 695§2. The guidance of a qualified canon lawyer should be sought to ensure compliance with the requirements of Canon Law. |
| 2.4 |
The AO, on behalf of the Diocesan/Religious Safeguarding Commission, remains responsible for the management of any enquiry into alleged abuse or matters of concern. |
| 2.5 |
Where an accused person has been convicted of an offence, or where the facts relating to any accusation are fully admitted, the AO will make recommendations to the Diocesan/Religious Safeguarding Commission, including the possibility of commissioning an Independent Risk Assessment. In these cases, it will rarely be necessary to instruct any independent person to undertake preliminary enquiries (iii).
iii) In the case of a cleric or member of the religious, the canonical process set out in 2.3 still applies however. |
| 2.6 |
Where the relevant facts of an allegation are in dispute and there has been no conviction or prosecution, or where the extent of any behaviour of an accused person remains uncertain, the AO will undertake an initial assessment to determine whether there may be any basis to the allegation. If there appears to be such a basis, and after having received the approval of the Diocesan/Religious Safeguarding Commission, the AO will commission an independent person to carry out the appropriate enquiries and draw up a report as expeditiously as possible. The time to complete this report should not normally extend beyond 6 months. |
| 2.7 |
In every case notification of this process must be made by the AO to the Insurance Officer prior to commencing the enquiry. The Insurance Officer will then notify the insurers as appropriate. |
| 2.8 |
In all cases where a civil claim has been intimated or commenced involving allegations against the accused person, when notified by the AO of the intention to institute an enquiry, the Insurance Officer must liaise with the insurers, and with any solicitors appointed by the insurers, to agree how best to approach the enquiry and must then notify the AO of the agreement reached. In the event that agreement cannot be reached, the matter must be referred to the Trustees and to the Bishop/Congregation Leader by the Diocesan/Religious Safeguarding Commission for a decision as to how to proceed. |
| 2.9 |
The independent person will be commissioned through CSAS who will maintain a list of approved people. The AO should prepare a brief for the independent person explaining the nature of the enquiry to be undertaken and the probable scope of the work. A written agreement detailing payment and expenses arrangements, confirmation of insurance cover, as well as the outline of the work to be undertaken, should be signed at this stage. |
| 3.1 |
The independent person should have in his/her possession a brief from the AO and all the relevant documents held by the Diocese or Congregation. There is an expectation that all the relevant files held within the Diocese or Religious Congregation will be available for scrutiny. Where the AO is unsure about any aspect of information-sharing from a data protection perspective, legal advice must be sought. |
| 3.2 |
The independent person should then interview the relevant witnesses, including the complainant and the accused. Statutory agencies should be invited to disclose all relevant documents in their possession. Liaison with the LADO Local Authority Designated Officer should be maintained where appropriate. |
| 3.3 |
The independent person should bear in mind that, in principle, all the information which he/she intends to present with his/her report should be disclosed to the accused. Therefore, before interviewing any witness, including a complainant, the independent person should advise them that the information they disclose may be revealed to the accused person. |
| 3.4 |
When a complainant is unwilling to co-operate or to proceed further, the independent person, while taking account of the difficulties this might cause in gathering the necessary information, should not automatically abandon the enquiry. It must be borne in mind that the Church requires this enquiry to be carried out for the protection of all its members and that the complaint is not ‘owned’ by the complainant. The independent person should therefore continue to gather and assess information from all those willing to speak to him/her, and make his/her report to the AO. |
| 3.5 |
When the independent person considers it necessary, he/she may take legal advice. Before they do so he/she must consult the AO who may recommend a diocesan/congregational solicitor. The cost of such advice shall be borne by the Diocese/Congregation. |
| 3.6 |
The independent person’s report must be in writing and made to the AO, who has the responsibility to present it to the Diocesan/Religious Commission. |
| 3.7 |
Where the report reveals that there is no basis to support any concerns, the AO should report this fact to the Diocesan/Religious Commission which will normally require no further action to be taken. |
| 3.8 |
When the report confirms that there is a basis to the allegations or concerns, the Diocesan/Religious Commission must convene a panel to consider the report and to determine what recommendations to make to the Bishop/Congregation Leader. |
| 4.1 |
The Diocesan/Religious Commission panel must consist of three members. Its members may be drawn from existing members of the Diocesan/Religious Commission. Where the Chair of the Diocesan/Religious Commission and the AO consider it appropriate to do so, they may appoint members of other Commissions and/or competent persons to sit on the panel and to constitute some or all of the panel. Such competent persons shall be approved by the Bishop/Congregation Leader. |
| 4.2 |
The Chair of the panel may be a member of the Diocesan/Religious Commission or a competent person nominated by the Chair of the Diocesan/Religious Commission and approved by the Bishop/Congregation Leader. He/she must have experience of chairing a similar body. |
| 4.3 |
The report of the independent person, with the statements of all witnesses and any other documents on which he/she has relied, must be sent to the accused person at least 28 days before the meeting of the panel. Where the accused wishes to produce statements from additional witnesses on his/her behalf, he/she must send copies of these statements to the AO not less than 14 days before the meeting of the panel. The panel shall permit the production of such statements unless there is good reason not to do so. In exceptional circumstances, both the AO and the accused may request an extension to these timescales. |
| 4.4 |
The panel must consider all the information presented to it and any written submissions made on behalf of the accused (iv).
iv) Whilst a preliminary investigation prior to a canonical penal process as established in the Code of Canon Law does not foresee any form of canonical representation, an exception to this occurs where the allegation against a cleric concerns the sexual abuse of a minor. In these circumstances a procurator/advocate must be appointed before the case is submitted to the Holy See. |
| 4.5 |
The panel may wish to hear directly and separately from the independent person, the accused and the complainant. If invited, they may attend in person with the accused and complainant being allowed to have a support person in attendance, though not acting in any legal capacity. The accused may speak with the panel and present his/her views as of right. |
| 4.6 |
Following the meeting the panel must decide what recommendations to make to the Bishop/Congregation Leader. The written recommendations of the panel, together with the reasons on which they have reached their conclusions, must be sent to the Bishop/Congregation Leader, the accused person and the Commission within 7 days of the meeting. |
| 4.7 |
The Bishop/Congregation Leader must inform the complainant of the recommendations before he/she makes a decision concerning the appropriate action to be taken. |
Approved by the National Catholic Safeguarding Commission –14th December 2010.
