header-logo header-logo

Child sexual abuse inquiry concludes

26 October 2022
Issue: 8000 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal , Child law , Personal injury , Health & safety
printer mail-detail
Failure to report should be made a criminal offence and the time bar removed for victims bringing civil claims, the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA), led by Professor Alexis Jay, has recommended in its concluding report.

The IICSA, which heard evidence from more than 7,000 victims and survivors over a seven-year period, published its final report, ‘The report of the IICSA’, last week. It made 20 recommendations to help protect children, with three recommendations as the centrepiece.

First, there should be a statutory requirement of mandatory reporting for individuals in certain paid or voluntary employments who witness it or are told about it, with a criminal offence of failure to report.

Second, a national redress scheme should be set up, with straightforward processes to provide some monetary redress where victims have been let down by institutions. Third, the report recommends the creation of a Child Protection Authority in England and Wales, with powers to inspect any institution associated with children.

Other recommendations include a cabinet-level Minister for Children, a public awareness campaign on child sexual abuse, amendment of the Children Act 1989 to give parity of legal protection to children in care, extending the disclosure regime to those working with children overseas, and removal of the three-year limitation period or time bar for personal injury claims brought by victims.

Kim Harrison, executive committee member of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) called for the proposed changes to the law to be implemented without delay.

‘Trauma, shame, mistrust in authorities, fear, and an instinct to protect their families from the stigma of abuse are just some of the very valid reasons why people hold back on speaking out, let alone take the step to seek justice,’ Harrison said.

‘For survivors to be willing finally to go through the ordeal of proving their cases only to then discover they were not quick enough to act can be devastating for them. The law needs to recognise that survivors of childhood sexual abuse are unique and almost always seek justice later than other injured people—for very good reasons.’

Current estimates suggest one in six girls and one in 20 boys suffer sexual abuse before the age of 16. The IICSA report notes: ‘There remains an incomplete public understanding of child sexual abuse, exploitation and power dynamics.’ 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll