Scientology

Jacob Saulwick, writing in The Sydney Morning Herald on November 19, 2009, reports that the Church of Scientology potentially faces an enquiry following a series of accusations in Parliament against the group by Senator Nick Xenophon. Kevin Rudd expressed concern about Scientology, but will examine letters tabled by the Senator before further considering an investigation.

Senator Xenophon will move for an enquiry on the basis of these letters. The Greens support the move, which would include questions of religion-based tax exemption enjoyed by Scientology, and various aspects of consumer protection and OH&S legislation in relation to the group.

Scientology sources say an enquiry would waste of time and money, arguing that former members of religous groups are prone to unreliable accusations.

Accusations include --

• Charges going into hundreds of thousands of dollars to remain in the church.
• Routinely obstruction of ordinary medical treatment (but not abortions) for church staff.
• Pressure on female staff to have abortions, including "forced abortions''.
• "Confinement and torture'' of members.
• Obstruction of police investigation of a death
• Inaction over reports of sexual abuse by its members

Allegations of questionable practices by the Church of Scientology go back over many years, and the group has faced investigations in a number of countries, though it has been recognised as a bona-fide religion in Australia. It is reportedly risky to criticise the organisation, with some claiming they have been threatened with litigation for posting complaints or accusations.

At this point, however, the letters in Senator Xenophon's possession remain unsubstantiated allegations, and the Government has three options: to enquire whether the charges have any substance, to decide that the charges have no substance, or to remain agnostic on these questions while awaiting further complaints, if any.

The Scientologists' arguments that an enquiry is not worth having, either from the point of view of cost or from the point of view of alleged unreliability of the complainants, do not hold water, though.

To dismiss a complaint merely because it came from a former member of an organisation would be both illogical and contrary to the principles of justice.

Even if, on average, people who withdraw from a religion are particularly prone to bias, that says nothing about the reliability of any individual complainant. Furthermore, if one complainant out of the eight who have approached Mr Xenophon can establish a substantial case, that is sufficient to justify appropriate action, while to deny a hearing to a genuine complainant because some other complainants are unreliable witnesses would be a gross miscarriage of justice.

The Scientologist response is also puzzling considering the gravity of the charges. If they have no substance, surely to attack the credibility of accusers rather than to request a speedy enquiry in order to clear the organisation's reputation serves only to increase suspicion of the Scientology organisation.