Plaintiff and respondent J.W., through her guardian ad litem, sued defendant and appellant Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc. (Watchtower) and others for (1) negligence; (2) negligent supervision/failure to warn; (3) negligent hiring/retention; (4) negligent failure to warn, train, or educate J.W.; (5) sexual battery; and (6) intentional infliction of emotional distress. In January 2014, J.W. filed a motion to compel further discovery responses. On February 11, the trial court granted the motion in part. The trial court’s order compelled Watchtower to produce all documents Watchtower received in response to a letter sent by Watchtower to Jehovah’s Witness congregations on March 14, 1997, concerning known molesters in the church (1997 Documents).
By November 2014, Watchtower had not produced the 1997 Documents, and J.W. moved for terminating sanctions. At a hearing on the sanctions motion, the trial court offered Watchtower four days to produce the 1997 Documents. Watchtower declined the offer and refused to produce the 1997 Documents. The trial court granted the motion for terminating sanctions and struck Watchtower’s answer. The trial court clerk entered Watchtower’s default. After considering evidence, the trial court entered judgment in favor of J.W. and awarded her $4,016,152.39.
On appeal, Watchtower raises four issues. First, Watchtower contends J.W. failed to allege proximate cause in her first amended complaint (FAC). Second, Watchtower asserts its right of due process was violated. Third, Watchtower contends terminating sanctions were excessive because lesser sanctions may have been effective. Fourth, Watchtower contends the trial court erred by denying Watchtower’s motion for relief from the terminating sanctions.
A central thesis of Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc.’s (“Watchtower”) petition is that if it, as a religious corporation, claims that a document is protected by the clergy privilege, the courts are powerless to come to a different conclusion; indeed, powerless to even inquire as to the viability of that claim. (Pet. at 15.) According to Watchtower, the mere act of conducting judicial proceedings related to the claim of privilege results in excessive entanglement with religion. (Pet. at 20.) This radical position is directly at odds with hundreds of years of judicial precedent adjudicating—sometimes applying and sometimes rejecting—state law claims of clergy privilege.
Applying its thesis to this case, Watchtower argues that it is constitutionally entitled to affirmatively invoke the clergy privilege and seek court rulings upholding that assertion, but simply ignore any adverse rulings. As it had done in two prior cases involving similar orders to produce documents evidencing child molestation by its members (“Molestation Files”), Watchtower employed this “heads I win, tails you lose” approach in this case. (See, e.g., Lopez v. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., 246 Cal.App.4th 566 (2016); Padron v. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., 16 Cal.App.5th 1246 (2017).) It gambled that it could disrespect the judicial process and ignore court orders while the court lacked the authority to take meaningful action to correct its disobedience. It lost that gamble and was defaulted.
The First Amendment does not exist to provide religious institutions with a free pass to operate outside of the law.
In its Reply Brief filed this week in the Supreme Court, Watchtower claims it “is the ideal litigant to champion federal constitutional rights.” As evidence Watchtower cites a total of eight court cases in which it claims to have championed constitutional rights before the Supreme Court. An examination of those cited cases shows that Watchtower was not the plaintiff, defendant, petitioner, or respondent in seven of those eight cases.
The recently registered Australian company “Christian Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses (Australasia)” has issued a body of elders letter, dated August 28, 2019, instructing elders to destroy judicial hearing records and certain congregation records.
On 12 April 2019 a new Jehovah’s Witness company, “Christian Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses (Australasia) Limited” (CCJWA) was formed in Australia to administer congregations, congregation charities, and bodies of elders.
On 15 April 2019 CCJWA commenced formally trading in Australia under the business name “Jehovah’s Witnesses” despite that trading name being registered to Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Australia Limited (Watchtower Australia) since 31 July 2000.
Also currently operating in Australia is another legal entity called “Christian Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses” (CCJW) which was registered as a business on 3 December 2012.
On 5 November 2013, Watchtower Australia sent out a body of elders letter instructing all congregations to form as independent legal entities and charities and to register with the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission << ACNC >>. By the end of the month over 800 congregations within Australia had become their own legal entity trading under the business name “[NAME] Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses.” Under this legal arrangement congregation records, including judicial records and membership records, are the property of the individual charity and not CCJWA.
These 800 congregation charities and their corporate structure will be discussed in detail in a follow up post on JW Leaks, along with copies of all internal document and correspondence issued by Watchtower Australia on how to set up each new legal entity and charity.
In one of it’s first issued body of elders letters, the newly formed CCJWA, issued instructions to all elders to review congregational records, their personal computers, hard copy files, and their meetings bags for the purpose of record destruction.
[EXTRACT] Review of Current Records:
After discussing this letter as a body of elders, we would like the secretary along with the coordinator, or another assigned elder, to review what is currently in the congregation’s confidential file. They should examine the contents of all sealed envelopes in the file to confirm that they contain only the documents mentioned in the Shepherd book, chapter 22, paragraphs 22-23. The assigned elders should adhere to the direction in paragraph 26 when determining if the entire contents of the envelope should be destroyed. If the elders are not sure if a particular document needs to be retained, they should feel free to contact the Service Department for assistance.
Please ensure that all records kept in the file are in harmony with what is outlined in the Shepherd book, chapter 22, and our comments above. Additionally, we ask that each elder check his personal computer, or hard copy files, and even his meeting bag, to ensure that no confidential correspondence is retained outside the congregation’s confidential file. We would like the secretary to confirm with each elder that this has been done.
Destroying congregation records
Over the past few months in Australia, various congregations, and Watchtower Australia have received written requests from individuals for lawful access to documents, including judicial hearing records, as held on them. These records as requested included child abuse records and personal records. The right to access your personal information and congregational records is granted under the Commonwealth Privacy Act 1988 and the Australian Privacy Principles. See the link below for more information.
In addition, a number of law enforcement actions and investigations have commenced into various legal entities of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Australia as well as into individual leaders of the religion.
The documents referred to in the above cited body of elders letter to be destroyed, as sent out by the newly formed CCJWA, are among the documents currently being sought for both criminal and civil cases. As such the destruction of them may constitute the destruction of evidence.
For the purpose of assisting individuals so as to protect information held on them, the body of elders letter sent out by the CCJWA, dated August 28, 2919, is available for downloading below:
How to protect your right to access documents on yourself
For Australians, below are copies of two letters, in MS word doc format, that some individuals have recently used for the purpose of protecting their records; and so as to access information held on them from the Jehovah’s Witnesses:
Current Watchtower Australia Document Retention Policy
Please note this is not the document retention policy for CCJWA and individual congregations of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Australia who are registered as a charity.
WATCHTOWER DOCUMENT RETENTION POLICY
The primary purpose for recording and retaining this information is to enable Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Australia (“the Society”), which is responsible for the religion of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Australia, to supervise the religious activities of Jehovah’s Witnesses throughout the country, individually and collectively. This includes:
(1) Being aware of anyone who is no longer a member of the Christian Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses;
(2) Knowing what spiritual help and assistance has been given to the individual concerned;
(3) Providing whatever direction is needed to ensure that the Scriptural standards, as set out in God’s Holy Word, the Bible, are maintained in the Congregations of Jehovah’s Witnesses; and
(4) Ensuring that the individual concerned is given whatever spiritual help and assistance is needed if he or she wishes to again become a member of the Christian Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses in the future.
.
.
About JW Leaks
JW Leaks is about openness, transparency and accountability within the Church of Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watch Tower Society.
JW Leaks exposes and holds accountable the Watch Tower Society and those leaders within the Jehovah’s Witnesses organization that disregard or violate the laws of the land, and that cause religious harm to sections of the community.
.
Jehovah’s Witnesses . . . Proclaimers of “soon” since 1879
Jehovah’s Witnesses in Australia annual child protection compliance reports for 2018 and 2019
The Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse (CARC) recommended that, at a minimum, eleven institutions that were the subject of relevant Royal Commission hearings should provide annual progress reports by the end of 2018 and again in 2019. The National Office for Child Safety worked with these institutions to facilitate their public reporting in 2018 and 2019. Jehovah’s Witnesses were one of those eleven institutions.
Summary of 2019 report submitted by Jehovah’s Witnesses
762 congregations of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Australia
67,816 Jehovah’s Witnesses
Jehovah’s Witnesses claim they “are fully compliant with each of the recommendations” of the CARC.
Every elder and ministerial servant has a Working With Children clearance in those states where this is legislated.
Recommendation 16.28: Regarding the involvement of women: “we confirm that women can be and are fully involved in receiving and submitting evidence of child sexual abuse and in providing support to a victim. It is the Scriptural responsibility of congregation elders to determine whether the alleged perpetrator should remain one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.”
Recommendation 16.29: Regarding shunning: “we confirm that Jehovah’s Witnesses do not shun victims of child abuse but treat them with compassion, understanding and kindness.”
Image by Commonwealth of Australia. 2019. Used under CC BY 4.0 licence.
.
About JW Leaks
JW Leaks is about openness, transparency and accountability within the Church of Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watch Tower Society.
JW Leaks exposes and holds accountable the Watch Tower Society and those leaders within the Jehovah’s Witnesses organization that disregard or violate the laws of the land, and that cause religious harm to sections of the community.
.
Jehovah’s Witnesses . . . Proclaimers of “soon” since 1879
Watchtower Australia’s 2019 Financial Returns and new company directors appointed
On 19 December 2019 Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Australia Limited filed notification with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) of changes to their board of directors.
Out
Winston Reginald Payne (cessation date as company director: 01-11-2019)
Gregory John Frank (cessation date as company director: 01-11-2019)
Change of Officeholder Role
Allan John Wood (appointment date: 11-11-2019 as secretary, continues as company director)
New Appointments
Daryn Bentley Gee (appointment date: 01-11-2019 as director)
Tom Pecipajkovski (appointment date: 01-11-2019 as director)
.
Watchtower Australia Company Directors and Charity Responsible Persons (as of 2020)
JW Leaks is about openness, transparency and accountability within the Church of Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watch Tower Society.
JW Leaks exposes and holds accountable the Watch Tower Society and those leaders within the Jehovah’s Witnesses organization that disregard or violate the laws of the land, and that cause religious harm to sections of the community.
Jehovah’s Witnesses . . . Proclaimers of “soon” since 1879
The governing body of Jehovah’s Witnesses have approved the formation of an additional management corporation for Jehovah’s Witnesses in Australia and the formation of a new audio visual production company.
On 11 November 2019 a new Jehovah’s Witnesses company, “Kingdom Support Services (Australasia) Limited” (KSSA), was registered in Australia to “promote throughout Australasia the advancement of the Christian religion as understood and taught by the ecclesiastical Governing Body” and to “co-operate with or provide financial assistance to persons having similar aims and purposes and to other charitable organizations having similar aims and purposes within Australasia or elsewhere”.
The structure and charitable purpose of KSSA allows it to provide benevolent disaster relief (‘financial assistance’) to victims of the current bushfires in Australia, albeit limited exclusively to “Jehovah’s Witnesses [who] practice their religion under the spiritual direction of the Governing Body”. As of January 2020, the Jehovah’s Witnesses branch committee in Australia, under the direction of the governing body, have formed two Disaster Relief Committees to provide spiritual and material help to bushfire victims in Australia that meet the religion’s criteria.
Two days earlier, on 8 November 2019 another Jehovah’s Witnesses company, “AVS Productions (Australasia) Limited” (AVSPA), was registered in Australia to “record, produce, publish, and distribute or dispose by way of gift music, photographs, film, animation, and other intellectual property of a religious or charitable nature”.
Both new Jehovah’s Witnesses corporations have registered with the Australian Charities and Not-for-profit Commission (ACNC) as religious charities.
Despite the audio visual and animation production objects of AVSPA this new corporation also claims to “support members of the Worldwide Order of Special Full-Time Servants of Jehovah’s Witnesses”.
These two new Jehovah’s Witnesses companies join the new and controversial management corporation, Christian Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses (Australasia) Limited (CCJWA), which was formed on 12 April 2019 to administer congregations, congregation charities, and bodies of elders. and also to “support members of the Worldwide Order of Special Full-Time Servants of Jehovah’s Witnesses”.
CCJWA, despite being registered as a not-for-profit corporation with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), is yet to be approved as a charity by the ACNC. On 15 April 2019 CCJWA also commenced formally trading in Australia under the business name “Jehovah’s Witnesses” despite that trading name being registered to Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Australia Limited since 31 July 2000.
Also currently operating in Australia is another legal entity called “Christian Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses” (CCJW) which was registered as a business on 3 December 2012.
JW Leaks is about openness, transparency and accountability within the Church of Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watch Tower Society.
JW Leaks exposes and holds accountable the Watch Tower Society and those leaders within the Jehovah’s Witnesses organization that disregard or violate the laws of the land, and that cause religious harm to sections of the community.
Jehovah’s Witnesses . . . Proclaimers of “soon” since 1879
Jehovah’s Witnesses and Watchtower Australia have commissioned a secret legal report critical of the Australian ‘Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse’
On 14 November 2018, Australian-based barristers David Bennett AC, QC and James Gibson presented to Watchtower Australia and the Jehovah’s Witnesses organisation their commissioned review and opinion on the findings and recommendations of the Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse as it related to Jehovah’s Witnesses.
The review entitled “Review of the Commission’s Investigation into Jehovah’s Witnesses and its ensuing reports” was divided into four Parts, as follows:
Part One considered the history and powers of royal commissions in general.
Part Two considered particular aspects of the Child Abuse Royal Commission relevant to Jehovah’s Witnesses, including the Commission’s Terms of Reference.
Part Three considered the Commission’s findings and recommendations regarding Jehovah’s Witnesses, and the basis of such findings and recommendations.
Part Four considered the responses, as at 14 November 2018, of the Commonwealth and State Governments to the Final Report of the Child Abuse Royal Commission.
Following receipt of the commissioned review and opinion, Watchtower Australia requested from Bennett QC and Gibson that they prepare an Executive Summary of their review, with a focus on “the Commission’s findings and recommendations regarding Jehovah’s Witnesses and the basis of such findings and recommendations”.
On 11 February 2019 Bennett QC and Gibson presented to Watchtower Australia and the Jehovah’s Witnesses organisation their signed eight-page executive summary: “Jehovah’s Witnesses in Australia and The Final Report of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse”.
Extracts from the executive summary written by David Bennett AC, QC and James Gibson:
“The Commission’s dissection of the religious beliefs of Jehovah’s Witnesses … failed to discriminate between religious beliefs (and the obligations imposed by such beliefs) and the requirements of secular law”
.
“The Commission’s criticism of Jehovah’s Witnesses Bible-based religious beliefs and practices was misplaced”
.
“[W]e consider a large part of the Commission’s investigation into and evidence led about Jehovah’s Witnesses, which related to child sexual abuse within families of members of Jehovah’s Witnesses, was outside the Commission’s Terms”
.
“[A] more balanced and fair approach should have been adopted by the Commission”
.
“[T]he Commission considered that it had carte blanche to inquire into allegations of child sexual abuse [within Jehovah’s Witnesses]”
.
“[I]t is questionable whether proper regard was had by the Commission when coming to its findings on its analysis of the data, to Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Submissions regarding the case files”
.
“There was an inherent unfairness in the Commission’s investigation of Jehovah’s Witnesses”
.
Report of Case Study No. 29 and summary of findings image courtesy of SaySorry.org
Facts vs ‘Apostate-driven lies’
In the “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” the Child Abuse Royal Commission wrote the following in relation to the submissions from Watchtower & Ors:
“As noted in the Preface to this report, the Royal Commission received two sets of combined submissions made on behalf the Watchtower & Ors. We consider it appropriate to specifically address here two of the key submissions that were made … We do not accept that the child sexual abuse revealed in this case study has no connection with the activities of the Jehovah’s Witness organisation … We do not agree with this submission … The Royal Commission’s Terms of Reference require us to consider such matters and other ‘related matters in institutional contexts’. The definitions in the Terms of Reference of both ‘institution’ and ‘institutional context’ are not exhaustive and, in our view, they encompass the institution of the Jehovah’s Witness organisation and its activities.” – page 76. Download Case Study Report into Jehovah’s Witnesses published by the Child Abuse Royal Commission
The governing body of Jehovah’s Witnesses continue to deny the findings of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse.
Despite the above cited statement published by the Child Abuse Royal Commission, Bennett QC and Gibson wrote in their commissioned report to Watchtower Australia and the Jehovah’s Witnesses organisation that,
“In our opinion the Commission’s rejection of … two ‘key submissions’ made by Jehovah’s Witnesses led the Commission to conflate impermissibly, and contrary to its Terms of Reference, familial and institutional sexual abuse”.
Key paragraphs from the Executive Summary written by Bennett QC and Gibson
“2.14 In our opinion, had a challenge been made to a Court, it is reasonable to conclude that an Australian Court, applying the plain and ordinary meaning of the words and defined terms used in the Terms of Reference and applying conventional rules of construction, would have found that an examination of child sexual abuse in families of people who also happened to be members of Jehovah’s Witnesses, was beyond the scope of the Commission’s mandate”.
“2.15 We understand that while Jehovah’s Witnesses did not agree with the Commission’s reasons, they did not wish to exacerbate the trauma of either of the survivors or of their own witnesses and did not consider that their interests would be advanced by such a challenge – which would only have added to the damaging publicity surrounding the Commission”.
“2.19 In our view, even allowing for the Commission’s interpretation of the scope of its Terms of Reference, a more balanced and fair approach should have been adopted by the Commission to its presentation of the case file data. As it is, it is questionable whether proper regard was had by the Commission when coming to its findings on its analysis of the data, to Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Submissions regarding the case files”.
“2.23 Although the information obtained by the Commission in the private sessions clearly assisted the policy objectives of the Commission’s Terms of Reference, there are significant difficulties in relying on any findings based on private sessions”. [JW Leaks notes: for a discussion on the private sessions see the SaySorry.org article Private Session Narratives. To understand the scope of the alleged ‘significant difficulties in relying on any findings based on [all 8,013] private sessions’, as stated by Bennett QC and Gibson, refer to the Child Abuse Royal Commission’s Final Report Volume 5 Private sessions which publishes the findings of all private sessions].
“2.26 In our assessment the Commission paid little regard or appeared to give no weight to the historical context in which the two incidents investigated occurred. At the very least, the Commission should have considered whether the Scriptural requirement of corroboration in the so called “two-witness rule”, was comparable to what the police and the courts required at a similar historical period as that being examined in the two cases”.
The executive review and opinions of Bennett QC and Gibson are currently being used by the governing body of Jehovah’s Witnesses, and the various legal entities that they provide direction to, as an attempt to prevent or undermine current law enforcement and governmental investigations around the world into allegations concerning the prevalence of, and the mishandling of, child sexual abuse within the Jehovah’s Witnesses organisation. It is unknown as to whether Bennett QC and Gibson are aware of this. Both Bennett QC and Gibson have been contacted and formally invited to comment on this.
Recently the document produced by Bennett QC and Gibson was used by the Christian Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses in The Netherland as an attempt to try and stop the publishing of the official academic report on the “Sexual Abuse and Willingness to Report Within the Community of Jehovah’s Witnesses,” authored by Kees van den Bos, Marie-Jeanne Schiffelers, Michèlle Bal, Hilke Grootelaar, Isa Bertram and Amarins Jansma, with the cooperation of Stans de Haas, and commissioned by the Research and Documentation Centre of the Ministry of Justice and Safety.
Who is David Bennett AC, QC and what is his relationship with the Jehovah’s Witnesses organisation?
Barrister David Bennett AC, QC, was the former Solicitor-General of Australia. Bennett QC has represented the interests in Australia of both the Jehovah’s Witnesses organisation and the Scientology organisation over many years.
In 2013, Bennett QC represented a 17-year-old Jehovah’s Witnesses child in a blood transfusion case before the Supreme Court of NSW against the Sydney Children’s Hospital (see The Sydney Children’s Hospital Network v X [2013] NSWSC 368 and also X v The Sydney Children’s Hospital Network [2013] NSWCA 320). The Supreme Court ordered the blood transfusion (Download judgment). The instructing solicitor in those proceedings was Vincent Toole, legal counsel for Watchtower Australia and a Jehovah’s Witness elder. Counsel assisting Bennett QC in those proceedings was barrister Andrew Tokley SC. During the Child Abuse Royal Commission Tokley SC represented Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Australia, Geoffrey Jackson of the governing body of Jehovah’s Witnesses, and the interests of the Jehovah’s Witnesses organisation.
In Australia, Bennett AC, QC won the historic Supreme Court case that redefined religion and granted religious recognition for Scientology. In a speech at the opening of the new Australian-headquarters for Scientology Australasia in 2016, Bennett QC said:
“Out of all the cases that I have been involved in, I count your victory affirming that Scientology is a religion as the one that makes me the most proud, because since that time, courts around the world have relied on the Australian definition. And so, to be here celebrating with all of you, well, I see just what can result from a dramatic and revolutionary court victory in the name of religious freedom. And, it makes me even more proud to know that what began as a fight for what is fair, led to a decision that has spread across the world to guarantee the rights of people of all faiths.” – Scientology.org.au
.
“It is apparent from our Review that Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Commission shared common goals, namely, to ensure, as far as it is possible, that children are kept safe from predatory sexual behaviour”. – David Bennett AC, QC and James Gibson
.
Further information on the evidence-based criticism levelled at the Jehovah’s Witnesses organisation by the Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse see the review published by Say Sorry
JW Leaks is about openness, transparency and accountability within the Church of Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watch Tower Society.
JW Leaks exposes and holds accountable the Watch Tower Society and those leaders within the Jehovah’s Witnesses organization that disregard or violate the laws of the land, and that cause religious harm to sections of the community.
Jehovah’s Witnesses . . . Proclaimers of “soon” since 1879
Documents relating to the application by the ‘Christian Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses in the Netherlands’ to stop the publication of the academic paper “Sexual Abuse and Willingness to Report Sexual Abuse within the Jehovah’s Witnesses Community”
According to Utrecht University, the academic study commissioned by the Dutch Ministry of Justice and Security:
“focuses on the influence that patterns, rules, customs and structures within the Jehovah’s Witness community in the Netherlands have on the manner in which sexual abuse or alleged sexual abuse are dealt with as well as the willingness to report sexual abuse or alleged sexual abuse. One important conclusion of the study is that the manner in which the abuse is handled within the Jehovah’s Witness community leaves victims or alleged victims of sexual abuse feeling insufficiently recognised and supported.”
The study was commissioned by the Research and Documentation Centre (WODC) of the Ministry of Justice and Security, which requested a study be conducted in response to a motion of the Netherlands House of Representatives submitted by Van Nispen et al. (Motion 31015 no. 154). This motion served as main impetus for the WODC and the research project.
On 23 January 2020, the Ministerie van Justitie en Veilgheid (Ministry of Justice and Security) issued a internal government letter which presented and summarised the history of the report and the attempts by Jehovah’s Witnesses to suppress the report. In the letter, De Minister voor Rechtsbescherming, Sander Dekker, wrote:
“The report on willingness to report within the community of Jehovah’s Witnesses paints an extremely worrying picture. The investigation shows that there are reasons to believe that making a report is hampered by the closed nature of the community and the risk that the victim will be released. According to the respondents, the problems in dealing with reports of sexual abuse are also related to the closed culture of the community of Jehovah’s Witnesses. The research shows that elders of the community are strongly focused on keeping the community together by reconciling the perpetrator and the victim. The result of the experienced way of handling the report is that this leads to secondary victimization. Victims feel insufficiently heard, ignored, stigmatized and isolated.
“I expect every board of an organization, including the community of Jehovah’s Witnesses, to show signs of sexual abuse, to make every effort to prevent sexual abuse. This is especially true with regard to children. As Minister for Legal Protection, it strikes me that so many vulnerable victims felt that they were on their own, had not experienced recognition, and had not, or only recently, found their way to justice and official aid agencies.
“Following the report, a discussion has recently taken place at my ministry with the board. In addition, the board was urged to actively take up the recommendations from the report. In particular, it was about setting up a hotline within the community of Jehovah’s Witnesses where victims of (alleged) abuse can go.
“To my dismay, the board responded negatively to this. Instead of focusing on creating more openness and recognition for the position of victims within the community, it denied the need for this. In the meantime, the board has spared no time, resources or effort to prevent publication of the report. However, in the summary proceedings that were submitted to that effect yesterday at the Midden-Nederland District Court, the administration has been unsuccessful. For the Board’s complete response to the report, I refer you to the appendix.
“Now that the reports are public, I want to call on the board to adopt the recommendations from the reports in a last intrusive conversation. After all, change prompted and propagated by the Community of Jehovah’s Witnesses themselves is the most effective. This is independent of the possibilities that the government has in terms of legislation and official assistance to be able to take action against abuses. Following the final reports and the verdict of the Midden-Nederland court, I will personally discuss the measures to be taken from the community of Jehovah’s Witnesses themselves.” – English translation [non-authorized version]
Court documents submitted by Jehovah’s Witnesses to stop the publication of the report
As part of the court application to stop the publication of the academic report the Jehovah’s Witnesses submitted an “Expert Opinion” prepared by Holly Folk, Massimo Introvigne, and J. Gordon Melton. The opinion, written in English, stated in the opening paragraph:
“We have been requested by the law firm of Mr. Shane Brady, representing the “Christian Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses in the Netherlands”, to examine the report “Sexual Abuse and Willingness to Report Within the Community of Jehovah’s Witnesses,” authored by Kees van den Bos, Marie-Jeanne Schiffelers, Michèlle Bal, Hilke Grootelaar, Isa Bertram and Amarins Jansma, with the cooperation of Stans de Haas, and commissioned by the Research and Documentation Centre of the Ministry of Justice and Safety (Utrecht, December 2019: hereinafter “the Report”), and to comment on it based on our experience of several decades in the study of minority religions and the Jehovah’s Witnesses.”
The expert opinion, as used by Jehovah’s Witnesses, is interesting in that the authors define the word ‘apostates’ as a “technical term not implying value judgment” as used “by some sociologists”. (par. 11.)
A finding from the authors of the expert opinion highlight a complete lack of understanding about the structure of the Jehovah’s Witnesses organisation at the most basic level, that of a congregation. The authors state:
“It is also worth noting that the Jehovah’s Witnesses do not sponsor or provide any activities that separate children from their parents or otherwise take custody of children.” (par. 24.)
Jehovah’s Witnesses do indeed sponsor and provide activities that separate children from their parents. Examples of this are congregation field service, child mentoring programs, personal bible studies, Kingdom Hall cleaning, volunteer construction work, and even in the area of Scripturally-based discipline.
Secret legal report critical of the Australian ‘Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse’ used as evidence by Jehovah’s Witnesses to stop publication of the academic paper
On 14 November 2018, Australian-based barristers David Bennett AC, QC and James Gibson presented to Watchtower Australia and the Jehovah’s Witnesses organisation their commissioned review and opinion on the findings and recommendations of the Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse as it related to Jehovah’s Witnesses.
The report was used by the ‘Christian Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses in the Netherlands’.
JW Leaks is about openness, transparency and accountability within the Church of Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watch Tower Society.
JW Leaks exposes and holds accountable the Watch Tower Society and those leaders within the Jehovah’s Witnesses organization that disregard or violate the laws of the land, and that cause religious harm to sections of the community.
Jehovah’s Witnesses . . . Proclaimers of “soon” since 1879
The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York has published, as part of court proceedings, a copy of the newly revised secret Jehovah’s Witnesses elder’s manual ‘Shepherd the Flock of God’.
Commencing in 2018, various legal corporations under the direction of the governing body of Jehovah’s Witnesses commenced a campaign of legal action, corporate bullying, threats, and intimidation against numerous web sites, Facebook accounts, YouTube channels, and private social media accounts.
Among those targeted through 60 DMCA subpoena legal actions, commenced in the Federal Court by Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, Inc. and subsidiary corporations, was JW LEAKS who are not involved in these current proceedings.
On April 15, 2020 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, in the matter of DMCA Subpoena to Google, LLC, Case No.: 7:20-mc-00119, a ‘Supplement in Support of the Motion to Quash DMCA Subpoena’ was filed by anonymous Jane / John Doe which included a full copy of the recently revised version of the Jehovah’s Witnesses elder’s manual, ‘Shepherd the Flock of God’.
On April 16, 2020 District Court Judge Cathy Seibel issued the following order:
“The Court will not accept any further filings except Watch Tower’s 4/17/20 submission and Doe’s 5/1/20 response. Any other filings will be disregarded, so do not bother sending any.”
.
.
About JW Leaks
JW Leaks is about openness, transparency and accountability within the Church of Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watch Tower Society.
JW Leaks exposes and holds accountable the Watch Tower Society and those leaders within the Jehovah’s Witnesses organization that disregard or violate the laws of the land, and that cause religious harm to sections of the community.
Jehovah’s Witnesses . . . Proclaimers of “soon” since 1879
Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, Inc. v Truth and Transparency Foundation
On April 30, 2020, in the United States District Court Southern District of New York ,civil action was authorised by the governing body of Jehovah’s Witnesses against the Truth and Transparency Foundation and its founders over allegations of breaches of copyright laws.
Screenshot of Gerrit Losch in a leaked video on the FaithLeaks website
.
ACCORDING TO THE COMPLAINT
Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, by its attorneys, Cowan, Liebowitz & Latman, P.C., for its Complaint against Defendants The Truth and Transparency Foundation, Ryan C. McKnight, and Ethan G. Dodge alleges:
1.This is a civil action for copyright infringement in violation of the Copyright Act,17 U.S.C. § 101 et seq. This litigation seeks relief against the ongoing wholesale infringement of Plaintiff’s registered copyrights in 74 original motion pictures. Defendants, without authorization or permission from Plaintiff, have made unauthorized copies of Plaintiff’s motion pictures, and are reproducing, publicly displaying, publicly performing and distributing Plaintiff’s works online. Plaintiff, accordingly, seeks injunctive relief and statutory damages for willful copyright infringement.
…
12. Watch Tower over decades has created and published thousands of original works of authorship, including literary works, works of visual art, musical works, and motion pictures, and has secured over 3,300 federal copyright registrations for its original works. Under the Copyright Act, Watch Tower has the exclusive rights, among other things, to “reproduce the copyrighted work[s],” to “distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work[s] to the public,” and in the case of its “motion pictures and other audiovisual works, to perform the copyrighted work[s] publicly,” as well as to authorize or license others to engage in such activities. 17 U.S.C. § 106.
13. In mid-2018, Watch Tower learned that 487 of its copyrighted literary works were being reproduced, displayed and distributed without license or permission by Defendants on the faithleaks.org website.
14. On December 31, 2018, Watch Tower’s counsel notified Defendants that their unauthorized publication of Watch Tower’s literary works on the faithleaks site was in violation of Watch Tower’s exclusive rights under the Copyright Act, and demanded that such infringing materials be removed from the faithleaks site.
15. Defendants, through counsel, declined Watch Tower’s demand that its literary works be removed from the faithleaks site. Defendants did not contest Watch Tower’s ownership of valid copyrights, or its prima facie case of infringement of those copyrights, but instead asserted “the defense found in 17 U.S.C. § 107,” claiming that Defendants’ wholesale reproduction and distribution of complete works, unaltered and unaccompanied by new matter, was protected as fair use.
16. In May 2019, Watch Tower learned that a large number of motion pictures created by Watch Tower, including the 74 motion pictures at issue here, had been uploaded to and made available for public performance on Rutube, a Russian online video streaming service located at rutube.ru and available to users worldwide.
17. Watch Tower submitted to Rutube notices of claimed infringement, objecting to the unauthorized posting of its copyrighted works on the Rutube site and demanding their removal. In response, Rutube removed the Watch Tower videos from its site.
18. Shortly thereafter, Defendants posted the Watch Tower videos that had been “taken down” from Rutube to Defendants’ faithleaks.org site.
19. In a May 2019 article titled “2019 Jehovah’s Witness Convention Videos Published Again After Successful Takedown Request,” published on Defendants’ truthandtransparency.org website, Defendants boasted not only about their past infringements and refusals to comply with Watch Tower’s efforts to enforce its copyrights, but also about these new infringements, leaving no doubt as to Defendants’ willfulness.
20. The Watch Tower videos remain available on the faithleaks site to the present day.
.
.
About JW Leaks
JW Leaks is about openness, transparency and accountability within the Church of Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watch Tower Society.
JW Leaks exposes and holds accountable the Watch Tower Society and those leaders within the Jehovah’s Witnesses organization that disregard or violate the laws of the land, and that cause religious harm to sections of the community.
Jehovah’s Witnesses . . . Proclaimers of “soon” since 1879
On Thursday 13 April 2023, JW LEAKS received a direct email from Mr Daniel Scott of Peake Legal Solicitors, on behalf of one of his Australian-based clients, informing us that documents, relating to…
the ABC Four Corners program “Bearing Witness” (first aired on 13 September 2021);
the complaint made by Jehovah’s Witnesses Congregations Limited, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Australia Limited, and the Christian Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses (Australasia) Limited directly to the ABC about the above program;
the Raglan Kingdom Hall Fire and police correspondence;
the Bathurst Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses; and
the complaint and correspondence made by two Jehovah’s Witnesses legal entities to the Australian Communications and Media Authority about the ABC Four Corners program,
…have recently been published on the official government website of the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA).
JW LEAKS extends its gratitude for the exclusive ‘tip off’ to Mr Daniel Scott – whom we understand is an active Jehovah’s Witness and the current lawyer for Jehovah’s Witnesses Congregations Limited (his client referred to in the opening paragraph), in addition to also being the lawyer representing Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Australia Limited, and the Christian Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses (Australasia) Limited.
The documents released under the Freedom of Information Act by ACMA reveal the extensive lengths that Jehovah’s Witnesses Congregations Limited, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Australia Limited, and the Christian Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses (Australasia) Limited, went to in trying to have the ABC Four Corners program on the Jehovah’s Witnesses
“removed from any website on which it appears and [to] never be rebroadcast.”
[Doc 8. Attachment E to complaint – Part 1_Redacted. Item F. Conclusions, “Complaint to ABC …” page 46 of complaint.]
Ironically, they requested that the ABC say sorry for the program.
The documents released evidence the extent, and the lengths of deception, i.e. ‘theocratic warfare’, and potential defamation (libel), that Jehovah’s Witnesses Congregations Limited has engaged in while trying to launch their planned “civil proceedings” [email sent obo Jehovah’s Witnesses Congregations Limited by Peake Legal to NSW Police, dated 5 November 2021].
The documents also reveal the complete, total and utter failure of Jehovah’s Witnesses Congregations Limited to prove or establish any of its complaints in relation to, not just the broadcast itself, but also in relation to comments made by the numerous persons who appeared in the ‘Bearing Witness’ program.
What is of serious concern is that Jehovah’s Witnesses Congregations Limited, a company trust, was a party to the original complaint to the ABC. This 46-page complaint [Document 8. Attachment E to complaint – Part 1_Redacted] goes to great lengths in trying to individually and collectively discredit those persons who appeared on the ABC Four Corners program.
Due to the defamatory nature of the written complaint by Jehovah’s Witnesses Congregations Limited, JW LEAKS has decided not to publishDocument 8 [Doc 8. Attachment E to complaint – Part 1_Redacted – as read in conjunction with – Doc. 9 Attachment E to complaint – Part 2_Redacted].
Instead, we have provided below a link directly to the ACMA website for downloading of all documents in one convenient zip file. (Note: this is an Australian government website).
The actions and conduct of Jehovah’s Witnesses Congregations Limited also raise serious questions as to whether they have engaged in massive unlawful breaches of privacy laws and the Australian Privacy Principles, both in the collection of personal and sensitive information, and in the use of this information, in relation to those that appeared as part of the ‘Bearing Witness’ program.
Among those also singled out for criticism and attack included Lisa Flynn of Shine Lawyers and Irwin Zalkin of The Zalkin Law Firm.
We strongly recommend all those that appeared on the ABC Four Corners program ‘Bearing Witness’ seek legal advice in relation to the conduct and actions of Jehovah’s Witnesses Congregations Limited, specifically in relation to:
Defamation (libel) laws in the jurisdictions of Australia and the USA; and
Privacy laws within Australia (specifically the Information Privacy Principles in the Australian Privacy Act 1988).
According to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner, a breach of an Australian Privacy Principle is an ‘interference with the privacy of an individual’ and can lead to regulatory action and penalties.
Disclosure: JW LEAKS provided documents and other information, including footage, to ABC Four Corners for use in the ‘Bearing Witness’ broadcast.
The final complaint outcome
On 4 July 2022, ACMA informed the Jehovah’s Witnesses about the outcome of the official investigation into the ABC Four Corners broadcast ‘Bearing Witness’. The correspondence stated in part:
Thank you for your correspondence, received by the ACMA on 13 May 2022, on behalf of Christian Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses (Australasia) Limited, Watchtower Bible & Tract Society of Australia and Jehovah’s Witnesses Congregations, about the compliance of the Four Corners episode, ‘Bearing Witness’, with the ABC Code of Practice 2019 (the Code). I appreciate your patience while the ACMA has considered your clients’ complaint.
We have reviewed the complaint and note that, in summary, it expressed concerns relevant to Standard 2 (Accuracy), Standard 4 (Impartiality), Standard 5 (Fair and Honest Dealing) and Standard 7 (Harm and offence) of the Code.
I appreciate that this matter is of concern to your clients, and I thank you for taking the time to raise it with us.
When we receive a complaint about a broadcast, we weigh up a number of factors to help us decide whether to investigate further.
We have undertaken a detailed assessment of the complaint, a copy of the broadcast, the broadcaster’s response and the relevant rules in the Code. Based on those assessments, we have concluded that there were no issues that raised fundamental concerns with the ABC’s compliance with the Code and we have decided to take no further action.
[Doc 15. Email from ACMA to the complainant 4.0.02022_Redacted]
Watch the ABC Four Corners program “Bearing Witness”
.
.
Why did the Jehovah’s Witnesses Congregations Limited trust get involved?
Jehovah’s Witnesses Congregations Limited was established in 1982 to hold title to real property, namely all Kingdom Halls of Jehovah’s Witnesses in the state of New South Wales (NSW), Australia. The properties are held in trust on behalf of individual congregations and/or beneficiaries.
In the ABC Four Corners program footage was shown of the Raglan Kingdom Hall of Jehovah’s Witnesses, NSW (see above). This hall is used by the Bathurst Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Five days after the ABC Four Corners program aired, in the early morning hours of Saturday 18 September 2021, the Kingdom Hall of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Raglan, NSW, was completely destroyed by fire. The premises were not in regular use at the time due to the COVID pandemic.
A crime scene was immediately established by detectives from Chifley Command (Chifley Police District, NSW Police) and an investigation commenced with the assistance of Fire and Rescue NSW and the NSW Rural Fire Service. The investigation is still ongoing.
Image via Facebook
The fire correspondence
On Friday 5 November 2021, some seven weeks after the fire, NSW Police received an email from Peake Legal Solicitors representing Jehovah’s Witnesses Congregations Limited. This email exchange is included within the bundle of documents released by ACMA [Doc 10. Attachment E to complaint – Part 3_Redacted].
The email exchange states:
Dear Constable [redacted],
I refer to our telephone conversation this afternoon.
We act on behalf of Jehovah’s Witnesses Congregations Limited, the legal title holder of the Kingdom Hall of Jehovah’s Witnesses premises located in Raglan NSW, which was recently the site of a fire. Our client holds the property on trust for the Bathurst Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses, which is an unincorporated association.
Our client is seeking any information or evidence that the Police have been able to uncover, or conclusions that they have drawn, which tend to establish whether or not the fire was started accidentally or intentionally, and if so by whom. Such evidence is critical to civil proceedings which our client wishes to commence as soon as possible.
We look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.
NSW Police did not immediately acknowledge receipt of the email. On the morning of 10 November 2021, NSW Police received a follow up email from Peake Legal Solicitors which stated:
My client [Jehovah’s Witnesses Congregations Limited] has also asked me to ensure that the Police are aware, that only days before the Bathurst (Raglan) Kingdom Hall was burned down, an article was published on the ABC news website and a Four Corners report was aired on the ABC, both of which contained inflammatory falsehoods about Jehovah’s Witnesses, which in our view were capable of inciting hatred. The report and news article also featured footage of the Raglan Kingdom Hall.
…
We look forward to receipt of your advice regarding any evidence the police may have, that the fire was intentionally started.
Detective Senior Constable [redacted] of NSW Police responded to the email that afternoon, stating:
I am aware of the media articles surrounding the Jehovah’s Witnesses featuring the Raglan Kingdom Hall.
The investigation in relation to the circumstances surrounding the fire at the Raglan Kingdom Hall is ongoing.
I can confirm the following-
[redacted]
The email exchange reveals a potential strategy of Jehovah’s Witnesses Congregations Limited to launch “civil proceedings” in relation to the ABC Four Corners program ‘Bearing Witness’.
The very day before, on 9 December 2021, the Jehovah’s Witnesses submitted a formal ‘complaint’ to the Australian National Office for Child Safety in relation to the ABC Four Corners report that also featured the Bathurst Congregation’s Kingdom Hall.
The complaint stated:
False Media Reports Regarding Jehovah’s Witnesses
On 14 September 2021[sic], the ABC Four Corners report on Jehovah’s Witnesses focused on sensational and unchallenged accounts of hostile ex-Witnesses. The program made false and defamatory statements about the religion of Jehovah’s Witnesses. A number of false representations have arisen based on a gross misinterpretation of the Royal Commission into Institutional Child Sexual Abuse[sic] data that was recklessly and maliciously perpetuated by ABC Four Corners.
JW Leaks is about openness, transparency and accountability within the Church of Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watch Tower Society.
JW Leaks shines a light on, and holds to account, the Watch Tower Society and those leaders within the Jehovah’s Witnesses organization that disregard or violate the laws of the land, or that cause religious harm to sections of the community.
Jehovah’s Witnesses . . . Proclaimers of “soon” since 1879
The Governing Body has decided that the traveling overseers arrangement is to be deleted. All currently serving traveling overseers (circuit overseers), and their wives, will be reassigned to ‘the field’.
The Watchtower magazine. April 15, 2013. JW.ORG
The adjustment
Country and regional Branch Committees will bare the responsibility to recruit and then re-assign elders from each locality region (think former circuit), who will then serve a small number of congregations on a temporary basis when needed. Former traveling overseers will be given preferential consideration for the assignment privilege.
One corporate advantage of this adjustment is that appointments of elders, and ministerial servants, will be given the outward appearance of a local arrangement with no direct branch office (or Watch Tower Society) involvement. This removes the current vicarious liability of elder / agent / employee arrangement.
In addition, with the recent removal of the field service hours reporting requirement, and the newly introduced permission to grows beards for brothers, ‘co-ordinating overseers’ will have very little to go on in their appointment of both new elders and ministerial servants. This is expected to potentially increase appointments, but may actually back-fire.
This new adjustment also removes both the Watch Tower Society’s liability, and the overall institutional liability, in relation to future appointed ‘agents’, while at the same time allowing the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses to retain full control of congregations, bodies of elders, and assets at the local congregational level.
Elders appointed as a local ‘co-ordinating overseer’ (circuit overseer) will not visit their own congregation, but rather will be assigned to audit and shepherd other congregations. No renumeration, reimbursement, or stipend will be paid by the organization.
Current serving traveling overseers, and their wives, will be primarily reassigned to ‘the field’.
Motor vehicles on current lease will be required to be returned after a short readjustment period. This readjustment period is not for the benefit of the deleted traveling overseer, but rather to prevent an influx of used motor vehicles having needed to be prepared for return to the lease companies, or prepared for resale. Excess vehicles will be offered for sale via dedicated online websites.
A special Branch Committee sub-committee will also bear the responsibility to recommend and recruit suitable elders, or former traveling overseers, from each congregation locality region (think former circuit), who will then serve a small number of congregations on a temporary basis. This establishes a legally binding relationship between the locally appointed elder and the local congregation under the new ‘co-ordinating overseer’ arrangement. This arrangement places all vicarious liability and legal liability for appointments, and retention, of elders and ministerial servants on the regional and local ‘co-ordinating overseer’.
A key consideration for any elder, or former traveling overseer, in considering accepting such an ‘assignment’, would be the protection of their own assets in the event of a lawsuit, particularly in relation the mishandling of child sexual abuse allegations by the congregation and body of elders, who ironically appointed the new ‘co-ordinating overseer’ to overseer such matters. There will be no insurance offered by the Watch Tower Society, or the Christian Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses, as this creates an agent / employee relationship.
Further, there will be no so-called ‘circuit overseer wives’.
A hierarchical readjustment of the Jehovah’s Witnesses organisational arrangement will also take place so as to remove and protect the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses from liability.
The financial savings alone, directly and indirectly, will be enormous.
An increase in Kingdom Hall sales
An increase in Kingdom Hall sales will follow, with an increased focus on wealthy non-English speaking regions (i.e. real estate asset rich) in the Asia Pacific region.
These newly appointed local ‘co-ordinating overseers’ will also bare the responsibility in facilitating the selling off of congregation Kingdom Halls, but not their own, in selected areas, and the removal of bodies of elders that refuse to co-operate with the redistribution of ‘dedicated funds’. Download actual letter of removal of bodyof elders.
This Kingdom Hall sales readjustment arrangement creates a pseudo ‘at arms length’ position for both the Watch Tower Society and the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Monies derived from the increase in the sale of Kingdom Halls will be transferred out of the relevant country / region and placed into one of a number of inter-related Cash Management Centers (CMC), currently operating under the direct control of the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Evidently, the ‘light gets brighter’.
JW LEAKS
_____________________________________
This article was produced in conjunction with JW News.
JW Leaks receives ongoing support and funding via JW News.
Please support JW News for as little as the cost of a coffee
Click above and support JW News for the cost of a coffee
About JW Leaks
JW Leaks is about openness, transparency and accountability within the Church of Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watch Tower Society.
JW Leaks shines a light on, and holds to account, the Watch Tower Society and those leaders within the Jehovah’s Witnesses organization that disregard or violate the laws of the land, or that cause religious harm to sections of the community.
Jehovah’s Witnesses . . . Proclaimers of “soon” since 1879
The below photo image, as shared with JW Leaks, was recently taken from a computer believed to belong to a person who is part of a group of individuals that are attacking and trying to undermine the findings and credibility of the Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, by spreading disinformation.
Photo image of computer screen belonging to person publishing disinformation
Can you identify the computer and the image? If so, we need your help. Why?
Someone has launched a disinformation campaign claiming that the Final Report of the Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, namely Volume 5, Private sessions, has been edited by the Royal Commission and reduced to only six pages.
Further information obtained by JW Leaks points to a concerted effort by a number of persons to potentially ‘destroy’ the findings and credibility of the Royal Commission, not only those findings against the Watchtower Society and the Jehovah’s Witnesses, but also the findings of the entire Final Report against all institutions named.
The primary target for the disinformation campaign appears to be the ex-Jehovah’s Witnesses community and survivors of childhood sexual abuse from out of the Jehovah’s Witnesses institution.
The information being privately spread via social media is completely false.
The full contents of Volume 5, Private sessions are, and have always been available, on the official Child Abuse Royal Commission website. See download link below.
Item 1 (in red), as circled on the above computer screen image, identifies that the disinformation document is on a private computer and not on the official Child Abuse Royal Commission website.
Item 2 (in red), as circled on the above computer screen image, identifies that the document on this private computer is only six pages in size. Volume 5, as available on the Child Abuse Royal Commission website is 467 pages in total.
Item 3 (in red), as circled on the above computer screen image, contains the name of the report that the person publishing the disinformation is trying to claim the document is a full copy of.
Further, according to sources, the person/s behind the disinformation campaign are also falsely claiming that the Child Abuse Royal Commission removed the online private session narratives from the official government website. This claim is completely false. The private session narratives, including those about the Jehovah’s Witnesses, are still published as an online appendix on the official Child Abuse Royal Commission website. See download link below.
The publishing and spreading of disinformation, especially about the findings and Final Report process of the Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, is not only insidious but is highly offensive and damaging to all survivors of child sexual abuse within the Jehovah’s Witnesses institution and the Australian community.
There is no rationale or excuse to publish such disinformation. Perpetrators of this type of conduct need to be held to account and need to be called out.
If you have information on who these persons are, or can assist further in investigating this matter, please contact JW Leaks via the below email so that appropriate action can be taken; including, where appropriate, referral to the Office of the Attorney General of Australia and the Australian Federal Police.
JW LEAKS
_____________________________________
JW Leaks receives ongoing support and funding via JW News.
Please support JW News for as little as the cost of a coffee
Click above and support JW News for the cost of a coffee
About JW Leaks
JW Leaks is about openness, transparency and accountability within the Church of Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watch Tower Society.
JW Leaks shines a light on, and holds to account, the Watch Tower Society and those leaders within the Jehovah’s Witnesses organization that disregard or violate the laws of the land, or that cause religious harm to sections of the community.
Jehovah’s Witnesses . . . Proclaimers of “soon” since 1879
JW Leaks is about openness, transparency and accountability within the Church of Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watch Tower Society.
JW Leaks shines a light on, and holds to account, the Watch Tower Society and those leaders within the Jehovah’s Witnesses organization that disregard or violate the laws of the land, or that cause religious harm to sections of the community.
Jehovah’s Witnesses . . . Proclaimers of “soon” since 1879
JW Leaks is about openness, transparency and accountability within the Church of Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watch Tower Society.
JW Leaks shines a light on, and holds to account, the Watch Tower Society and those leaders within the Jehovah’s Witnesses organization that disregard or violate the laws of the land, or that cause religious harm to sections of the community.
Jehovah’s Witnesses . . . Proclaimers of “soon” since 1879
Jehovah’s Witnesses and body of elders refuse to hand over personal information records as required by law
Of interest in the proceedings was an affidavit from Kevin Knaus, a member of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Canada, who deposed that the teachings and instructions of Jehovah’s Witnesses, as applying to elders, constitute “canon law”.
Judgment summary
Two of the respondents applied, pursuant to s. 23(1) of the Personal Information Protection Act (“PIPA”), for disclosure of their personal information from two Jehovah’s Witnesses congregations. In response, the congregations withheld certain information on the basis that it was privileged and confidential religious communication.
An adjudicator acting as a delegate of the commissioner under PIPA reviewed the congregations’ decisions to withhold information. She ultimately ordered that the information must be disclosed to her under s. 38(1)(b) of PIPA so that she could determine whether it needed to be provided to the respondents. The adjudicator considered the congregations’ argument that PIPA breached their right to freedom of religion protected in s. 2(a) of the Charter. She found that while ss. 23(1)(a) and 38(1)(b) of PIPA infringed s. 2(a) of the Charter, the infringement was justified under s. 1. On judicial review, the chambers judge dismissed the appellants’ petition, expressing substantial agreement with the reasons of the adjudicator.
Held: Appeal dismissed. The adjudicator erred in finding that ss. 23(1)(a) and 38(1)(b) of PIPA infringed the Charter. Properly interpreted, these provisions empower the commissioner to consider the appellants’ Charter rights in deciding whether to order production of records for the commissioner’s review. To the extent that a production order made under s. 38(1)(b) unjustifiably infringes the Charter rights of an organization, the source of the infringement is the order itself and not the provisions of PIPA. In this case, the production order proportionately balanced the appellants’ Charter rights with statutory objectives, and therefore the decision to issue the order was reasonable.
JW Leaks is about openness, transparency and accountability within the Church of Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watch Tower Society.
JW Leaks shines a light on, and holds to account, the Watch Tower Society and those leaders within the Jehovah’s Witnesses organization that disregard or violate the laws of the land, or that cause religious harm to sections of the community.
Jehovah’s Witnesses . . . Proclaimers of “soon” since 1879
