Victims the Biggest Losers

Otago Daily Times
August 9, 2016

https://www.odt.co.nz/opinion/editorial/victims-biggest-losers

What a shambles. The supposedly august and sweeping Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse in England and Wales appears increasingly tenuous after the departure of its third chairwoman in two years.

British Home Secretary Amber Rudd announced last week that New Zealand judge Dame Lowell Goddard had resigned from the inquiry, which was established in 2014 in the wake of the Jimmy Savile sex abuse scandal and tasked with investigating how state and other institutions handled their duty of care to protect children.

Dame Lowell had been in the job for 18 months. The announcement appeared to have come out of the blue and no explanation was given. Dame Lowell later made a public statement in which she commented about the inquiry's ``legacy of failure'' which had been ``hard to shake off''. It appeared very much as if she was simultaneously admitting defeat and laying blame.

That ``legacy'' is certainly hard to ignore. The two previous chairwomen (retired English judge Baroness Elizabeth Butler-Sloss and lawyer and former Lord Mayor of London Fiona Woolf) had been forced to resign (after only a week and two months in the job respectively) after revelations they had close links with establishment figures.

Given that legacy, the scale of the work involved, and the undeniable pressures of the job, there will be sympathy and understanding for Dame Lowell from some quarters. Indeed, a prominent victims' advocate believes the judge was doing a good job and had the confidence of victims and the inquiry secretariat.

However, in the interest of the inquiry, it seems reasonable Dame Lowell should heed calls and front up to MPs about her reasons for resigning. Anything that can be done to mitigate any problems identified is vital. It seems it is a job few are willing and/or able to do: a high-profile, highly-scrutinised role, with a significant burden of responsibility and weight of expectation - and likely a wall of obstruction to overcome. It can't have been easy going - even with a generous remuneration package.

Dame Lowell had come under attack in the British media for her salary (more than 500,000 - or $NZ920,000 - annually), her annual leave (30 days) and for working outside Britain (she had reportedly spent 44 days working in Australia and New Zealand). Some will feel her terms and conditions are outlandish; others think it reasonable remuneration for the nature of the job, and others may find it acceptable she spends time with her family in New Zealand and in Australia (the inquiry is liaising with the Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Child Sexual Abuse - and in the digital age, work can be carried out in any location, after all).

But there had been questions raised about her competency - particularly in terms of her understanding of English law. In the latest twist in this ignominious saga there are claims by British media she was ``effectively fired'' because she had lost the confidence of senior Home Office staff and inquiry panel members. The Home Office has denied that is the case.

The situation is far from desirable. Until the whole truth of the matter is revealed, it will - rightly or wrongly - cast a shadow on Dame Lowell's reputation, could reflect badly on New Zealand, and certainly leaves a wealth of questions about the integrity and stability of the inquiry.

Mrs Rudd has vowed it will not disrupt the investigation, but it is undoubtedly an unsettling time for victims who must wonder, yet again, if the inquiry will ever be able to deliver what it has promised, and the accountability and justice many hope for.

It would be a real tragedy if the most important voices were drowned out in the personal uproar.