State school sex abuse inquiry could avoid ‘heart of the issue’

Survivor advocates are fearful an upcoming inquiry into the Education Department’s response to the risk of child sex abuse in schools won’t deal with perpetrators, and could exclude victims.

• Child sex abuse survivor advocates worry government won’t answer why it moved alleged paedophiles
• Inquiry announced into sexual abuse in public schools

SURVIVOR advocates say it is essential that victims are represented at an upcoming inquiry into the risk of child sex abuse in Tasmania’s state schools – and that the scope is widened so perpetrators can be brought to justice.

The independent inquiry into the Education Department’s systems in relation to the risk of child sex abuse was announced last week by Education Minister Jeremy Rockliff, following the release of historical evidence showing the department protected at least two alleged paedophile teachers.

Lawyer Sebastian Buscemi, who is representing a number of historic child sex survivors who were molested by state school teachers, said it was essential to have someone on the inquiry’s panel who could accurately and compassionately tell the stories of survivors.

“A panel like that can become overly legalistic and miss the real issue that survivors face and what their experiences have been,” he said.

He also said including an advocate would help avoid the risk of a foregone conclusion, keeping the inquiry accountable to those that had suffered.

Mr Buscemi was also concerned about the current terms of reference, saying they seemed to limit what the inquiry could do – such as pass on individual cases for the police to prosecute.

“It’s looking largely at what the policies were at the time, and the problem isn’t that there weren’t any policies – the problem is they were being ignored,” he said.

Sex abuse claims lawyer Sebastian Buscemi in Hobart. Picture: RICHARD JUPE

“The terms of reference seem to limit what the inquiry can do – it can’t make findings on individual perpetrators or individual cases.

“It seems to avoid the heart of the issue. It seems like it will conclude that there are some really good laws right now and won’t answer why alleged paedophiles were moved school-to-school.”

He also said comparisons to the royal commission into institutional child sex abuse were “disingenuous”, given the royal commission didn’t examine Tasmanian state schools or their culpability, and given the issues involved were vastly different.

Allison Ritchie, former Labor politician and founder of People Protecting Children, had similar concerns.

“We would ask – if it’s a multi-member panel – that the government consider putting an advocate on there for victims because I think that sends a very important message that the government is serious about making sure that their point of view is heard,” she said.

Ms Ritchie also raised concerns there wouldn’t be an investigatory body set up to deal with allegations raised in the inquiry.

“It is imperative that people are able to come and give their accounts, fully detailing what they know, fully detailing their experiences, and that all appropriate efforts will be made to source responses,” she said.

In the terms of reference released last week, the state government stipulated the inquiry would not make any findings or recommendations about individual cases of alleged child sex abuse including the identification of perpetrators.

It also stipulated no findings would be made into the potential legal liability of the state government or into state funds for the purpose of compensation or damages.

A state government spokesperson said an independent reviewer had not yet been appointed, but that the inquiry aimed to complement the royal commission, not replicate it.

They confirmed the inquiry would not look into individual cases but rather examine historic systems that failed to prevent child sex abuse in government schools.

Follow @ambervwilson