JWTruth.orgRessource documentaire comparative
Ask JWTruth Rechercher
Français

Cette page en

En anglais uniquement

Toutes les langues

Protection des mineurs · Claim record

La Commission royale a conclu que le maintien et l'application continue, par l'organisation, de la règle des deux témoins aux plaintes pour abus sexuels sur enfants 'is wrong', que cette règle 'will more often than not operate in favour of a perpetrator', et qu'elle devrait être révisée et modifiée, au moins dans les affaires d'abus sexuels sur enfants.

Claim ID claim-safeguarding-arc-two-witness-wrongConcerns octobre 2016Constat indépendant
Constat indépendant · octobre 2016 Vérifié

La Commission royale a conclu que le maintien et l'application continue, par l'organisation, de la règle des deux témoins aux plaintes pour abus sexuels sur enfants 'is wrong', que cette règle 'will more often than not operate in favour of a perpetrator', et qu'elle devrait être révisée et modifiée, au moins dans les affaires d'abus sexuels sur enfants. Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, octobre 2016Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, Case Study 29, 9 novembre 2015

Position de l’organisation ou explication ultérieure : '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) ; la règle est 'in harmony with the law of evidence' et des mesures de précaution sont prises même en l'absence de preuves (par. 9.211-9.216). En mars 2017 : 'the two-witness rule is required by the scriptures and can't be changed or avoided... That's our stand' (p. 26525).

Afficher les preuves (2 sources)
Document public officiel Vérifié

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”

octobre 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').

Source officielle Numérisation de l’original Lien non vérifiable automatiquement

Note de provenance et de vérification

Note sur la fiabilité. 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.

Provenance de la numérisation. 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.

Corroboré par. 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.

Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source. src-arc-2016-1000-cs29-report

Document public officiel Vérifié

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 novembre 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.

Numérisation de l’original

Note de provenance et de vérification

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

Provenance de la numérisation. 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).

Corroboré par. src-arc-2016-1000-cs29-report

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

Date de consultation. 19 septembre 2026 · Identifiant de la source. src-wt-subs-2015-1109-royal-commission

Page de l’affirmation Corriger ou mettre à jour

A direct link to this claim is https://jwtruth.org/fr/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.