Criminological study on abuse in the Catholic Church in Germany

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The German Bishops' Conference initiated a criminological study on abuse in the Catholic Church in Germany after the debate about cases of sexual abuse in the Roman Catholic Church increased in 2010 . In June 2011, the German Bishops' Conference unanimously decided to conduct this study together with the Criminological Research Institute of Lower Saxony (KFN) and its director Christian Pfeiffer .

In January 2013, the Bishops' Conference terminated the KFN's contract and stopped the criminological study on abuse in the Catholic Church in Germany . The KFN then announced an independent study without the help of the church and called on the victims of abuse by priests to cooperate directly with the KFN for the purpose of anonymized questioning.

background

The project of criminological research into sexual abuse in the Catholic Church in Germany was initiated in 2010 by the Association of Dioceses of Germany (VDD). All 27 bishops would have welcomed a scientific investigation by Pfeiffer. In the contract dated July 8, 2011 available to the FAZ , nine dioceses selected as representative had made a binding commitment to participate in the research project.

Previously, several dioceses had checked their personal files since the Second World War on the occasion of the abuse cases that became known in 2010. Results from the Archdiocese of Munich and Freising were available in 2010 . There over 13,000 personnel files were checked by the law firm Westphal, Spilker and Wastl. In her report, attorney Westphal assumed a significant number of unreported cases , since files were destroyed to a considerable extent and files were stored outside the ordinariate in private apartments and were thus exposed to manipulative access. The first results were also available from the interim report of the abuse officer of the Regensburg diocese .

Individual religious orders also introduced appropriate measures. For example, after the abuse cases that had become known, the Salesians of Don Bosco set up a working group made up of internal and external people, which regularly published interim reports. The third interim report lists 62 reports from those affected from the 1950s onwards; 28 of them related to sexual assaults of varying severity. The reported cases also include those that were already known and convicted under criminal law . The third interim report already contains some consequences for the work in the facilities .

Contract concluded in June 2011

On June 20, 2011, the German Bishops' Conference unanimously passed the resolution that church employees, under the supervision of a team from the Criminological Research Institute of Lower Saxony, consisting of retired public prosecutors and judges, should back up all personal files from the past ten years (additionally in nine of the 27 dioceses as far back as 1945 ) should search for evidence of sexual assault. The KFN should only receive data from suspect persons and only in anonymized form ; the external lawyers involved in the file evaluation must commit themselves to silence towards third parties.

The network of Catholic priests raised serious concerns about this project , as it saw the data protection of the priests concerned and the relationship of trust with the respective bishop at risk if all the dioceses' personal files were to be made accessible to third parties. There was also fear of confirmation of a social “ general suspicion ” against all priests. In the summer of 2011, the German Bishops' Conference published the exact regulations on file inspection and made it clear that the personal files could not be viewed by third parties outside the bishopric.

In November 2011, Vicar General Peter Beer, Archdiocese of Munich and Freising , withdrew from the project advisory board. He stated that his critical questions had not been adequately answered.

Study crisis in July 2012

The dioceses of Regensburg , Munich and Dresden left the project in July 2012.

Uwe Winkel, spokesman for the Network of Catholic Priests , assumed that the study would actually end in July 2012. He pointed to the authority of the Holy See to issue instructions and was of the opinion that the study had to fail because of the destruction of files according to Codex Iuris Canonici :

“After consultation with several chair holders for ecclesiastical law , it is not possible for the secret archives of the bishops to be opened without the permission of the Holy See and for the files contained therein to be used contrary to their intended use (cf. can. 490 § 3 CIC). Since according to can. 489 § 2 CIC the files of criminal cases in moral proceedings whose defendants have died or which have been convicted for a decade would have to be destroyed, a research project in which the relevant files are to be included - 65 years retrospectively - would in any case fail sentenced."

At this point in time , Pfeiffer dismissed two employees who had already been hired.

Termination by the German Bishops' Conference in January 2013

On January 8, 2013, a message from netzwerkB announced that the German Bishops' Conference had terminated the contract on the study due to differences with the KFN. The institute did not receive the notice of termination in writing on January 9, 2013.

The head of the KFN, Christian Pfeiffer , stated that the study had " failed because of the censorship and control requests of the church". Pfeiffer's report that church members from several dioceses pointed out to him that files on perpetrators had been destroyed was emphatically denied by the bishops' conference speaker Matthias Kopp. Ackermann told the Rhein-Zeitung in January 2013: “Then there was mistrust when Professor Pfeiffer had the impression that files were being destroyed. To this day I have no reliable information about this. "

In an interview with Spiegel on January 14, 2013, the abuse commissioner of the Bishops' Conference, the Trier Bishop Stephan Ackermann , specified his statements. The accusation of the destruction of files is "so generally incorrect". The church has already admitted that its "record keeping in previous years had not met the standard". However, it is a fact "that the facts and the judgment in moral proceedings must be kept", accordingly "no act and no perpetrator fall under the table". Spiegel Online had previously reported that canon law provides for the destruction of a large part of the files on moral crimes. It says there: “Annually, the files of criminal cases in moral proceedings whose defendants have died or which have been convicted for a decade must be destroyed; a short fact sheet with the wording of the final judgment is to be kept ”.

The church initially took legal action against the allegation of “censorship” with an injunction against Pfeiffer. Pfeiffer thereupon stated that he did not want to comply with this, as no power of attorney had been attached to it and it was therefore not legally valid. On January 21, it became known that the Association of Dioceses of Germany had withdrawn the application for an injunction submitted to the Hamburg Regional Court .

Presentation of the events by the conference of bishops

According to the statements of the speakers, the bishops 'conference ended the cooperation because of "irreconcilable differences" : Regarding data protection and personal rights, an agreement with the head of the KFN unfortunately failed, Pfeiffer showed, according to the spokesman for the bishops' conference, "volatility and lack of seriousness" . As further reasons, Ackermann cited reservations of the network of Catholic priests and canon law requirements for the opening of "secret archives" by the bishops. The money already paid to the KFN would be reclaimed.

Speculations that the Archdiocese of Munich left the project prematurely to protect the former Archbishop Joseph Ratzinger and then Pope were rejected as dishonest by Bishop Ackermann.

Presentation of the events by Christian Pfeiffer

In a detailed interview for Deutschlandfunk on January 9, 2013, Pfeiffer presented his view of the events surrounding the termination.

Pfeiffer emphasized in the detailed interview that there was an existing contract that the church wanted to change. These negotiations had been going on since May 2012. The church demanded an amendment to the contract: in particular, the KFN had to submit all the texts of the church as the client (client was the German Bishops' Conference , contractual partner of the KFN was the Association of Dioceses of Germany ) to the study for approval before publication . The new treaty should give the church the right to prohibit the publication of texts. Pfeiffer viewed this as incompatible with the principles of scientific work. Pfeiffer's counter-proposal, in order to partially meet the wishes of the church, to include a possible controversial opinion of the church in its publications, but marked as such, was rejected. The church would at least have had the opportunity to present its own view of things after each chapter. However, the church insisted on its original demand and expanded it to include the demand for a say in the recruitment of KFN employees for this study. To contractually secure its claims, the church also demanded clauses on “inappropriate claims for damages”.

Pfeiffer emphasized that there had been a valid contract in which one had also agreed on sensitive data protection. In this old contract it was “as usual that, eight weeks after the submission of the research report, the KFN is completely free to publish what we have researched in doctoral theses, habilitation theses and other publications. In the old contract everything was properly regulated. ”The church now wants to terminate this old contract for the research project because there was no amicable agreement on a new contract formulation. Pfeiffer saw this as an attempt by the church to change the treaty in the direction of censorship and stronger control rights by the church. Hence his conclusion: "We couldn't go along with that ... I just made it clear with all the emphasis and with all clarity that we will not allow ourselves to be censored. ... we cannot accept these control requests ”.

When asked, Pfeiffer speculated about the motives of the church: During the preparations for the study ( pretests / pre-tests to examine the structure of the files and elaboration of the questionnaires) in the Archdiocese of Munich and Freising , the church side might first be clear about the thorough procedure for this study become. In particular, Pfeiffer received information that files had been destroyed in some dioceses.

“... there is a rule according to which one has to destroy the files ten years after the conviction of a priest. We were left in the dark about that. The public was not informed about this either, because the contract stipulates that files will be analyzed back to 1945. "

After the preliminary tests in the Archdiocese of Munich and Freising for the purpose of developing the questionnaires, these detailed data collection forms were presented to the church advisory committee. The reaction of the Catholic Church was to initiate its withdrawal to clarify the cases of abuse:

“... then it became clear in the advisory council's advisory meetings when the representative of the Munich diocese then said that it is not enough that we are only allowed to advise here, that must become a decision-making body, we just have to have control over everything then we are ready to continue to participate ... "

The Archdiocese of Munich and Freising then drafted a new contract through which the church can control everything about the study as described above. This draft was presented to the KFN in May 2012.

A written request from the KFN from October 2012 to disclose whether and to what extent files had been destroyed was not answered by the church. The regulations on the destruction of files were probably only observed in a few dioceses. For a scientific work at least the extent of the gaps in the files had to be estimated, since today's files no longer fully reflect the true history of abuse in the Catholic Church in Germany. However, Pfeiffer only received the answer to the inquiries that "this inquiry alone destroyed trust in the long term".

Finally, Pfeiffer reports that he was asked to maintain confidentiality:

"This was announced to me in direct conversation, if we are not ready to sign a non-disclosure agreement about everything that has happened here, then it would just be terminated."

Reactions to the termination

Norbert Denef , chairman of the network for victims of sexualised violence (netzwerkB), said about the failure: “If it were about education, justice and help for the victims, much more work would have to be done than the cooperation agreement with Professor Pfeiffer had promised . We see, however, that voluntary self-commitments make no sense if the institutions involved cannot and do not want to. This is where the state is called for and a policy that cannot be intimidated by the religious communities. The churches stand outside the rule of law. A lot has to change. "

Heinz Hilgers , President of the Child Protection Association , denied the Catholic Church's willingness to provide information: “I suspect that strong forces in the Catholic Church are now working according to the forgetting-and-forgiving method.” Klaus Müller , theologian from Münster, suspects a power struggle among the bishops: "It can only be because the side of the bishops who consider this form of enlightenment to be right is under massive pressure from the conservative forces."

The lay movement We are Church saw the resignation as a “devastating signal for the credibility of the church leadership” and “calls on each of the 27 German bishops to declare in lieu of oath that no entries relevant to the investigation in personnel files in their diocese have been deleted in the past, and that too will not happen in the future. "

Justice Minister Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger (FDP) reported that she had always had good experiences with Pfeiffer. He is "really one of the top addresses in Germany." The impression would arise that "in the end the Church wanted to have a hand on what should really be published and what not in terms of knowledge that is gained."

Hans Joachim Meyer , CDU politician and former President of the Central Committee of German Catholics , on the other hand, argues that Pfeiffer “does not always succeed in making a precise distinction between scientific seriousness and popular pedagogical fury, and that he may not even be sufficiently aware of its necessity ". He was therefore astonished that the Bishops' Conference commissioned Pfeiffer to lead a “research project on the highly sensitive problem of abuse cases in the church”.

Daniel Deckers , theologian and political editor at the FAZ, accuses Pfeiffer in this connection of "gimmicky escalations" and "dazzling causal chains", "more than once his assessments have proven to be hasty, if not completely wrong". Deckers accuses both sides of having dealt with basic legal questions too ignorantly at the beginning of the research project: “Specialist lawyers who saw the text of the contract approved by Pfeiffer and the bishops in autumn 2011 were appalled. The text testified to the stupid ignorance of the contracting parties with regard to the provisions of general canon law , church service law , the right to informational self-determination and the state-guaranteed duty of care of the employer . "

Alternative study by the KFN

In his interview for Deutschlandfunk, Pfeiffer announced that he would continue the abuse study despite the contract being terminated by the Catholic Church, but in a different form.

To this end, at the end of the interview he called on the victims of abuse to report directly to the KFN, so that a scientific evaluation of these cases of abuse can be carried out without the church files:

“We are now trying to save what can be saved by asking all nationwide victims that we would otherwise have asked through the church. We now ask you to come to us voluntarily so that we can send you the anonymous questionnaire, which you please return to us. In this way, on a voluntary basis, the project could still be saved in view of what the victims have experienced. ... [we] hope that as many as possible will take part in this voluntary investigation, so write to us and then we can send you the questionnaire, of course with guaranteed anonymity. "

In surveys outside the church, the KFN found 500 abuse victims among 11,500 respondents. The KFN wants to compare this information from victims of abuse with information from victims of sexual abuse by priests and evaluate them scientifically.

Alternative study of the Catholic Church

The abuse commissioner of the German Bishops' Conference, Stephan Ackermann , stated that the processing should be pursued "promptly", but left the period for the award of a new research contract open. In 2013 the situation was different from 2010, when the Roman Catholic Church was “under unbelievable public pressure” and therefore the cooperation with Christian Pfeiffer “perhaps came about in a hurry”. Therefore, they want to take more time with a new attempt. He also indirectly indicated that some of the dioceses could get out of the project. Although he does not want to participate in such speculations, a study would still be "on an empirically reliable" basis, even if a diocese were to leave .

In March 2014, Ackermann presented the new project. A research consortium consisting of four institutes led by Harald Dreßing from the Central Institute for Mental Health in Mannheim was commissioned with a three and a half year study. Among other things, it should clarify whether there were or are structures and dynamics in the Catholic Church that encourage abuse. In March 2015, the ARD documentary “The Silence of Men” reported on the progress of the research project. It was criticized here that only church employees still had access to the personal files and that no investigation was made into how those responsible in the dioceses dealt with cases of abuse. The results of the new, so-called MHG study ("Sexual abuse of minors by Catholic priests, deacons and male religious in the area of ​​the German Bishops' Conference") were presented on September 25, 2018.

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ^ Bishops' conference stops scientific study , FAZ from January 9, 2013
  2. ↑ Lawyers Westpfahl, Spilker and Wastl: Key statements of the report Sexual and other physical assaults by priests, deacons and other pastoral workers in the area of ​​responsibility of the Archdiocese of Munich and Freising in the period from 1945 to 2009. Inventory - assessment - consequence of December 2, 2010, Information on the press conference on December 3, 2010 ( online ; PDF; 85 kB)
  3. ↑ Third report of the Don Bosco Salesians working group to investigate allegations of sexual abuse and mistreatment. from March 31, 2010 ( online )
  4. ↑ https://magazin.spiegel.de/EpubDelivery/spiegel/pdf/79408568
  5. ↑ The concept for the research project can be viewed on the website of the German Bishops' Conference, cf. Christian Pfeiffer; Lena Stadler: The sexual abuse of minors by Catholic priests, deacons and male religious members in the area of ​​the German Bishops' Conference, research concept for an empirical study, July 13, 2011 ( online ; PDF; 119 kB)
  6. ^ Press release from the German Bishops' Conference of August 5, 2011
  7. ↑ Checking files on cases of abuse: priests insist on data protection. In: Spiegel online . August 6, 2011, accessed March 18, 2015 .
  8. ^ Joint declaration by the secretary of the German Bishops' Conference, P. Dr. Hans Langendörfer SJ, and the director of the Criminological Research Institute Lower Saxony (KFN) eV, Prof. Dr. Christian Pfeiffer. German Bishops' Conference , August 5, 2011, accessed on March 18, 2015 .
  9. ↑ abuse in Catholic Kirche.Im secret. (detailed article in the FAZ of January 12, 2013, full of background information)
  10. ↑ Suspiciously quiet. In: Die Zeit - Christ & Welt, July 26, 2012 ( online )
  11. ↑ For the end does not justify the means! Interview, kath.net, July 14, 2012 ( online )
  12. ↑ a b Church processing failed. netzwerkB press release, January 8, 2013 ( online )
  13. ↑ a b c Interview by Christian Pfeiffer on Deutschlandradio (8:30 minutes), the corresponding original sound
  14. ↑ Church stops solving the abuse scandal. In: Süddeutsche Zeitung , January 8, 2013 ( online )
  15. ^ "Inglorious End" In: kathisch.de , January 9, 2013 ( online ( Memento from January 12, 2013 in the Internet Archive ))
  16. ↑ Rhein-Zeitung ( online )
  17. ^ Bishop on aborted abuse study. "A massive disappointment for the victims" . In: Spiegel Online , January 14, 2013. Retrieved January 14, 2013.
  18. ↑ Catholic Abuse Study. Destroyed trust . In: Spiegel Online , January 10, 2013. Retrieved January 14, 2013.
  19. ↑ FAZ.net : The Catholic Church takes legal action against Pfeiffer because of allegations of censorship , on January 10, 2012
  20. ↑ Lammert criticizes the failure of the abuse study . In: Die Welt , January 10, 2013. Retrieved January 10, 2013.
  21. ↑ Pfeiffer sees himself confirmed. Controversial topic: censorship allegation to the bishops . In: Mainpost , January 21, 2013. Retrieved January 22, 2013.
  22. ^ Bishops' conference stops scientific study , Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung , January 9, 2013
  23. ^ "Inglorious End" In: kathisch.de , January 9, 2013 ( online ( Memento from January 12, 2013 in the Internet Archive ))
  24. ↑ "It's not about censorship." In: kathisch.de , January 9, 2013 ( online )
  25. ↑ "The basic trust was no longer there" In: Paulinus, weekly newspaper in the Diocese of Trier, January 20, 2013 [1]
  26. ↑ Tagesschau ( online )
  27. ↑ The church has failed to come to terms with it. In: Die Zeit , January 9, 2012 ( online )
  28. ↑ Child Protection Association President Hilgers accuses the Catholic Church of covering up - criticism of the federal government. In: Saarbrücker Zeitung , January 10, 2013 ( online )
  29. ↑ Spiegel ( online )
  30. ↑ Press release from We Are Church, January 9, 2012 ( online )
  31. ↑ Handelsblatt ( online )
  32. ↑ Between Seriosity and Furor In: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung of January 19, 2013
  33. ^ A foreseeable scandal in the Enlightenment , In Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung of January 16, 2013; On-line
  34. ↑ Barriers to new abuse study ( Memento from March 13, 2014 in the Internet Archive ). In: Augsburger Allgemeine , January 14, 2013. Retrieved January 14, 2013.
  35. ↑ Süddeutsche : Sexual Abuse in the Catholic Church. "A Sorrowful Number of Cases," March 24, 2014
  36. ↑ Süddeutsche : ARD documentary about abuse scandal. Troubled Children of God , March 16, 2015
  37. ^ ARD documentary: The silence of men. The Catholic Church and Child Abuse ( Memento of March 7, 2015 in the Internet Archive ), March 16, 2015

Remarks

  1. ↑ Die Zeit already suspected at the time the contract was signed that "some of the files were probably destroyed." - see: ZEIT ( online )