School sex inquiry fears

Abuse findings may miss ‘real issue’

AMBER WILSON

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 pedophile 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 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 terms of reference, saying they seemed to limit what the inquiry could do – such as pass on individual cases for the police to prosecute.

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 raised concerns there wouldn’t be an investigatory body set up to deal with allegations raised in the inquiry. In the terms of reference released last week, the 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 government spokesman said they were unable to respond given an independent reviewer had not yet been appointed.