JWTruth.orgDocumented comparison resource
Search

Child safeguarding · Claim record

The Royal Commission found that the organisation's retention and continued application of the two-witness rule to complaints of child sexual abuse 'is wrong', that the rule 'will more often than not operate in favour of a perpetrator', and that it should be revised and modified at least in child sexual abuse cases.

Claim ID claim-safeguarding-arc-two-witness-wrongConcerns October 2016Independent finding
Independent finding · October 2016 Verified

The Royal Commission found that the organisation's retention and continued application of the two-witness rule to complaints of child sexual abuse 'is wrong', that the rule 'will more often than not operate in favour of a perpetrator', and that it should be revised and modified at least in child sexual abuse cases. Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, October 2016Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, Case Study 29, 9 November 2015

The organisation’s position or later explanation: 'Jehovah's Witnesses consider that the requirement for two witnesses is not a matter for debate as it is based on Scriptural requirements' ( par. 5.18); the rule is 'in harmony with the law of evidence' and precautionary measures are taken even where evidence is lacking (pars. 9.211-9.216). In March 2017: 'the two-witness rule is required by the scriptures and can't be changed or avoided... That's our stand' ( p. 26525).

Show the evidence (2 sources)
Official public record Verified

Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, “Report of Case Study No. 29: The response of the Jehovah's Witnesses and Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Australia Ltd to allegations of child sexual abuse”

October 2016 · pp.1-110 (ISBN 978-1-925289-89-3) · pp. 10-12, 14, 24-25, 58-70, 75-78 · The Hon. Justice Peter McClellan AM (Chair); Professor Helen Milroy (Commissioner) · Commonwealth of Australia

“Although the position is not clear in relation to a few files, there is otherwise no evidence before the Royal Commission of the Jehovah's Witness organisation having reported to police or other secular authority a single one of the 1,006 alleged perpetrators of child sexual abuse recorded in the case files held by Watchtower Australia.”

P. 60. Other key passages: p. 58 (files since 1950 record allegations against 1,006 members; 579 admissions; at least 1,800 alleged victims); p. 59 ('The numbers tell their own story'); p. 61 ('We are satisfied that it is the general practice of the Jehovah's Witness organisation in Australia not to report allegations of child sexual abuse to the police or other authorities unless required to do so by law'); p. 65 (two-witness rule: 'retention of and continued application of the rule to a complaint of child sexual abuse is wrong'); p. 67 (men-only decision-making is 'a fundamental flaw'); p. 69 ('places children within the organisation at significant risk'); p. 70 (BCG 'completely shunned, ostracised and actively avoided'); p. 77 ('We do not consider the Jehovah's Witness organisation to be an organisation which responds adequately to child sexual abuse').

Official source Scan of original Link not auto-checkable

Provenance and verification note

Confidence note. The official Royal Commission host could not be reached from this environment (TLS renegotiation failure / timeouts), so the NZ-hosted copy of the same Commonwealth publication was downloaded and text-extracted; all quotations verbatim with printed page numbers. Tabled in Parliament 28 November 2016.

Scan provenance. Copy of the Commonwealth publication (CC BY 3.0 AU) held in the New Zealand Abuse in Care Royal Commission evidence library; identical ISBN and pagination to the official release.

Corroborated by. src-wt-subs-2015-1109-royal-commission, src-arc-2015-0814-day155-transcript

Notes. Public hearing 27 July-5 August and 14 August 2015, Sydney. Survivors identified only as BCG and BCB. Also on parlinfo.aph.gov.au as a tabled paper.

Accessed. 19 September 2026 · Source ID. src-arc-2016-1000-cs29-report

Official public record Verified

Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, Case Study 29, “Submissions on behalf of Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Australia & Others (SUBM.1029.001.0001)”

9 November 2015 · pp.1-141 · pars. 5.17-5.18, 9.12-9.19, 9.210-9.216, 9.355-9.359 · Counsel for Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Australia Ltd and the elder witnesses · Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse (Commonwealth of Australia)

“Jehovah's Witnesses consider that the requirement for two witnesses is not a matter for debate as it is based on Scriptural requirements found in the Mosaic Law and reiterated by Jesus Christ and the Apostle Paul. Even when the requisite Scriptural evidence is lacking, elders nevertheless take precautionary measures.”

Par. 5.18. Par. 9.16: 'when an allegation is made by an adult survivor of child sexual abuse, it is not the right of an organisation to make a report on that adult's behalf unless the adult requests that it be done.' Par. 9.211 compares the two-witness rule to the criminal standard of proof and the hearsay rule. Pars. 9.358-9.359 quote the 1 October 2012 letter to bodies of elders (pars. 11-13) on remaining 'vigilant' and warning parents.

Scan of original

Provenance and verification note

Confidence note. Downloaded and text-extracted the 141-page PDF; quotations verbatim. This is the organisation's formal written response to Counsel Assisting's proposed findings.

Scan provenance. New Zealand Abuse in Care Royal Commission evidence library copy of the Australian Royal Commission submission (RC doc ID SUBM.1029.001.0001; NZ ID MSC0500435).

Corroborated by. src-arc-2016-1000-cs29-report

Notes. The Case Study 29 report (pp. 8-9, 59, 76) summarises and responds to these submissions.

Accessed. 19 September 2026 · Source ID. src-wt-subs-2015-1109-royal-commission

Claim page

A direct link to this claim is https://jwtruth.org/evidence/claim-safeguarding-arc-two-witness-wrong/. Every source above opens the original document or the best available copy. If you believe the wording, date or context is wrong, report an error.