VATICAN CITY (VATICAN CITY)
Union of Catholic Asian News (UCA News) [Hong Kong]
April 6, 2026
By Kieran Tapsell
The child sexual abuse scandal has been described as the worst crisis that the Catholic Church has had to face since the Reformation.
The Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, in its 2017 Final Report, found that canon law imposed serious impediments to a proper response by the Church to the sexual abuse of children. It recommended changes to the canonical disciplinary system. Some of those, such as the abolition of the pontifical secret over child sexual abuse, have been adopted.
However, there are still outstanding matters. One is the refusal of the Church to impose mandatory reporting to the civil authorities unless there is an applicable civil reporting law. In 2014, the United Nations Committee for the Rights of the Child criticized this failure.
In 2023, the Holy See imposed mandatory reporting to the Church by Church personnel of evidence or suspicions of child sexual abuse by clergy, religious, and laity holding positions in the Church. The reason given for refusing to impose mandatory reporting in all cases to the civil authorities is that the Church operates in countries with repressive governments.
Every coherent legal system in the world makes exceptions where the general rule is inappropriate. In 1842, the Holy Office under Pope Gregory XVI issued an instruction absolving penitents of their canonical obligation to denounce priests who solicited sex in the confessional in the lands of “schismatics, heretics and Mohammedans”, the repressive regimes for Catholics at the time. The 1983 Code of Canon Law provides for some 1,300 exceptions to general rules. Canon 85 of the Code gives the Holy See power to provide dispensations even where exceptions are not provided for in the Code itself. There is ample opportunity in canon law to provide reporting exceptions for repressive regimes.
The most the Holy See was prepared to do was to allow the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith to issue a Vademecum dated June 5, 2022, encouraging Church personnel to report allegations of child sexual abuse to the civil authorities where there were no applicable civil reporting laws if “it is considered necessary to protect the person involved or other minors from the danger of further criminal acts.”
This did not impose any obligation to report under canon law. It did provide a vague accountability for office holders who cover up abuse by setting a standard for “culpable negligence in office” under Canon 1378.
The existence of repressive regimes is no excuse for the Church failing to make reporting to the civil authorities mandatory in the vast majority of countries that are not repressive.
The real problem with the failure to require mandatory reporting under canon law is that few countries have adequate civil reporting laws. Most countries have “welfare reporting laws” where specific professions, such as doctors, nurses, and teachers, are required to report sexual abuse to the civil authorities, where the victims are still children at the time the information is known. Clergy are not always included as mandatory reporters.
Most civil law systems do not require reporting of “historical abuse,” that is, where the victims were children at the time of the abuse but were adults when they brought it to the attention of the institution. The Australian Royal Commission found that the average time for which Catholics spoke about their abuse as children was 33 years. It also found that in the Archdiocese of Melbourne, more than 99% of the 304 cases dealt with under the Melbourne Response protocol involved historical abuse. In the state of Victoria, where clergy were not, at that time mandatory reporters under the welfare laws, none of the 611 cases of abuse known to the Church between 1996 and 2012 were reported by the Church to the police. Some were reported by the victims themselves.
The Australian Royal Commission considered that the mandatory reporting issue was best solved by changes to Australian State and Territory criminal laws to require reporting of historical abuse to the civil authorities. Since 2010, canon law has required Church authorities to comply with civil reporting laws. The effect of changes to Australian civil reporting laws was to make reporting of historical abuse to the civil authorities mandatory, also under canon law.
Another recommendation of the Australian Royal Commission was that canon law be changed so that decisions in disciplinary cases should be made on the balance of probabilities rather than based on “moral certainty.” Most canon lawyers regard that as being the equivalent of the criminal standard in the Anglo-American legal system of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The Holy See rejected this recommendation.
However, Australian law has effectively imposed the balance of probability in disciplinary matters for clergy and religious by its “working with children” legislation. This legislation provides that before anyone can work with children, they are required to have a permit. Working with children is defined to include religious services. The Children Commissioners can refuse a permit if they are satisfied on the balance of probabilities that a person poses a risk to children. The effect of this legislation is to render ineffective any decision by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith to acquit clergy or religious on the basis of no “moral certainty” of abuse, when a conviction on the balance of probabilities might have deprived them of ministry. Priests and religious who are found by the Children Commissioners to pose a risk to children on the balance of probabilities are effectively barred by civil law from any kind of ministry within that jurisdiction.
In light of the Holy See’s refusal to impose mandatory reporting to the civil authorities and to change its standard of proof in disciplinary cases, all countries would be well advised to follow the Australian working with children legislation to overcome those deficiencies in canon law.
The Australian Royal Commission found that child sexual abuse in institutions and its cover-up not only existed in the Catholic Church, but was found in many religious, government, cultural, and sporting institutions. Better reporting regimes and working with children legislation are important steps to reduce the harm done to children in all institutions, and not just those cared for or educated by the Church.
*Kieran Tapsell is a retired civil lawyer and the author of ‘Potiphar’s Wife: The Vatican’s Secret and Child Sexual Abuse’ (Second Edition 2024). He was a member of the canon law panel before the Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official editorial position of UCA News.