Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE VATICAN HAS responded to a report by a United Nations committee which criticised its policies that allowed for systematic and continued abuse of children by its priests.
In a statement this afternoon, the Holy See reiterated its commitment to defending and protecting the rights of children “in line with the principles promoted by the Convention of the Rights of the Child and according to the moral and religious values offered by Catholic doctrine”.
It confirmed that it had taken note of the concluding observations in the report, adding that it will be thoroughly studied and examined.
However, it also said that it “regrets” that some of the observations by the committee on the rights of the child are an attempt to “interfere with Catholic Church teaching on the dignity of the human person and in the exercise of religious freedom”.
The report commented on the Church’s positions on homosexuality, contraception and abortion.
Meanwhile, Irish victim support group One in Four has welcomed the report from the UN, noting its “scathing critique” of the Catholic Church’s attempts to cover up the extent of sexual abuse of children by members of clergy – and its failure to report incidents of such abuse.
“This report by an international neutral body confirms what has long been suspected: that the Vatican
had a far greater knowledge of the extent of clerical sexual abuse than it has ever acknowledged, and that it must take responsibility for creating a culture in the Church worldwide that protected sex
offenders and endangered children,” said executive director Maeve Lewis.
This vindicates absolutely what survivors of abuse have been saying over the past decade.
“The Vatican has always tried to lay responsibility for child sexual abuse on the individual offenders and on local bishops. It has never admitted that its policies and regulations ensured that priests were protected at the expense of children’s safety.
This falsehood is now exposed.
“If the Vatican is to retain any credibility it mustimmediately abide by the Committee’s recommendations, hand over allits records and immediately put in place a policy of mandatoryreporting of sexual crimes.”
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
fair play to the guy
i don’t fully understand the ramifications of this….
say i own a Social Network based solely in the US (US servers only). Can I now not attempt to signup European users because their data would automatically be going to US servers?
If this is the case then surely it will ensure that EU users lose out on many many new services in the future.
If this isn’t the case, then is there anything stopping Facebook for example to entirely relocate back to the US?
Miguel, as the guys below state, it is more than likely the data for global users will be stored in the EU (hopefully Athlone), it’s just they will have to ensure its not transferred back to the US. Facebook can still link the data and present it to US “friends”, but not persistently store that data. it would not make sense to move to US servers only, as the latency would impact performance that local CDNs remove, and user experience is paramount to social media users.
“In particular, there will be huge pressure on the Irish Data Protection Commissioner’s office when it comes to handling European internet users’ private information.!
I have just the man for the job, now that the current, frivilous Irish Data protection Commissioner has been outed:
Retired and availible:
Patrick Neary.!!
Irish Government act? make a decision?? Are you having a laugh???
a committee of government friends will have to be set up to decide on this at a cost of millions
This is not an Irish government issue. This rests at EU level now. The Data Protection (?) Commissioner now has to abide by this ruling and enforce the protection of the privacy rights of European citizens. The Irish government has no role in this decision or its enforcement.
The Irish govt has to enact the ruling of the ECJ in to domestic law and serious questions need to be asked about the competency of the DPC who dismissed this case as frivolous and vexatious.
Why do people always say “Questions need to be asked”, but never follow up with an actual question?
Is that a rhetorical question? Not sure if I should answer now.
The position of the Data Protection Commissioner and her senior staff is untenable at this stage. They’ve been found wanting by Europe’s highest court. The verdict is an indictment of the attitude of the Irish Regulator.
The last Commissioner Billy Hawkes has dodged this bullet, but there ought to be resignations all round.
Some chance, a pay rise and promotion , no one in this country’s civil service get to the top based on ability, it’s all brown nosing or else they pick someone that is expendable when it all goes tits up. it’s so corrupt it would be comical if it wasn’t so serious.
So what you are saying is that you want Europe to have a say in who we appoint to Statutory positions in Ireland
No, what I’m saying is that I want a Regulator to behave like a Regulator. The Court criticised the DPC for abdicating on their legal responsibilities, and that’s a serious issue.
Agreed 100% Ėamonn
A regulator that looks like a joke against the best of the worlds tech companies is a national embarrassment.
” there ought to be resignations all round.”
Are you kidding.?
This is Ireland.
what planet do you live on Eamonn Mac Eochaidh.?
Has ramifications for all cloud-based service providers who have been operating under safe harbour arrangements and who now possibly need to ensure all European citizen data stays in Europe. Perhaps a good time to invest in data-centre property sites..
Does it prohibit US staff for Google or Facebook accessing European customers data
I assume it does, as the access is from outside the EU
No, I shouldn’t think so. The issue is with the storage of data and not legitimate access to it. An employee of FB/twitter/Amazon, etc can access a customer’s data from outside the EU if there is a bona fide reason for doing so, e.g. fault or complaint resolution. What they may not do is transfer that data to a storage facility outside of the EU with the risk that it may be insufficiently protected from unsanctioned access by police or security services.
Good clarification Desmond. The key thing about such access is that the employee of the US company does not download or store data of an EU citizen to a local server or device – how that may be controlled is a different matter
It’s not the US based Google or Facebook they are worried about, it is the US Intelligence Agencies tapping into your phone and private life as they wish. You can thank Edward Snowden from uncovering this scam.
“YAY” indeed. This is fantastic news.
Irish Data Protection Commissioner not fit for purpose.
this could have implications for Facebook’s building of a data centre in the Midlands, but privacy trumps profit every time.
On the contrary, it makes Facebook’s need to construct additional data centres located within the European Union more pressing than ever.
It should but the Irish govern have always bent over backwards and had no respect for the privacy of its citizens in matters like this. The location of the Facebook building won’t change the courts ruling so it should still go ahead.
It will have no impact on the planned data centre, in fact it will require even greater investment in data centres for all cloud based and social media companies in the EU. In essence, the private data of EU citizens (and businesses) cannot now be held outside of the EU because the legislation that allows for that (the so-called Safe Harbour arrangements) have been found to be totally inadequate. This is a good day for the privacy rights of EU citizens and a good day for the economy. It’s not very often we get to say that.
Irish data protection commissioner is unable to do the job at present. she hasn’t got a clue,saying this case was frivolous. god help us.
Her predessor ruled could not put online video or pictures. of people breaking into your house It was against their privacy rights
Almost four years the EC proposed a Directive on protection of EU citizens data by foreign companies, this would have had the effect of protecting ‘data’ of persons, not simply ‘citizens’ located in the EU area.
Where is this legislation today, if introduced, it would provide some protection to their residents on the grounds under which this matter was lodged.
In the alternative, why did a european come to Ireland to lodge a case against companies from thenUS but located here?
Their EU headquaters in Europe is based here, from what i gathered from the article he came over because they where dealing with it EU wide through the offices here
Precisely DOB, what damage might this do our economy, FB and Google pay little tax here but do create employment for Irish people, who do pay taxes.
FB saw this coming a mile off. there’s no way in hell Safe Harbor can live up to it’s billing, given what we know now. it’s self-certified, for god’s sake.
good news for all things date-centre-y in the EU. and our privacy, obviously.
Just to be doublely clear… If you are reading this and you are in the NSA or CIA then I bear no ill will toward the U.S. and I think you’re a great bunch of lads. I am merely debating a point with another person. I hope to pass through your border controls without issue in the future as I have friends and family living there.
The Irish Data Protection Commissioner should be dismantled, it is an embarrassment.
Dismantle the role/office, not the person, of course :-D
I would love to know why Google would not let me into any sites…until I signed their privacy agreement!! I was ( forced into signing, I feel! . Then I logged in again later, and they wanted me to sign again.. so to avail of websjfes, I had fo sign. Have I a case against thsm?
Don’t use Google then, try alta vista instead
Not unless they also forced you to use those sites…
Absolutely, bring them to court there. open and shut.
This is a good thing
It’s every company that transfers personally identifiable information from the EU to the US. Not just US companies, and certainly not just US Tech companies. Also, it doesn’t necessarily mean that EU based data centres are required. At a minimum, Binding Corporate Rules (BCR’s) for data transfer need to be in place. A lot of legal and privacy consultants will make a lot of money in the short term.
Edward Snowdon is a traitor, plain and simple
Well Snowdon is stuck in a Moscow bedsitter for the rest of his life Poor man
He should be in a US Federal prison.
a traitor to whom? the US govt, or the US people/constitution?
very important difference.
He betrayed his country, he is a traitor.
country and government are not the same. sure look at this little sh!thole – perfect example.
he did not betray his country.
you managed to set up a Twitter account – surely you have the capacity to understand this.
“Country and government are not the same thing”, OMG is that really true, if only I had a dictionary or something similar.
Lets look at the dictionary definition of traitor shall we,
a person who betrays a friend, country, principle, etc
Yep I think that qualifies, but I’m not an expert, how about we put him on trial and let a jury of his peers decide.
Care to Explain how he betrayed America?
He sign a contract with the CIA, took their money and then broke his word.
So he betrayed the CIA? That’s not America. The declaration of independence says “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.” Edward Snowden shows more regard for the true America rather than what it has become. A lot of the practices of the NSA, the CIA, Homeland Security are more of a betrayal to the American people than Snowden ever will be.
Sorry to be clear, the data harvesting took place without the “governed” being aware. Snowden was bringing the facts to the public knowledge because the government whose power should come from the people was basically doing what the hell it wanted without regard for due process.
“put him on trial and let a jury of his peers decide.”
under the Espionage Act, he’s not allowed defend himself. I’d avoid that too.
Judges have ruled evidence of showing intent to inform the public, benefits of the leaks, and lack of damage to national security is inadmissible, so there’s that too.
but you stick to your mantras.
All of this is irrelevant unless he presents himself back in the US, none of you have convinced me he’s no a traitor.
What about the traitorous actions of the u.s.? Spying on the entire.world. no mention of that. America is a war mongering arms dealing shower of murders who think nothing of fabricating evidence to attack Iraq … which is an illegal.2at so get down of ur high horse. Americas veil well and truly slipped and we see them.for what they are. Corporate capitalism … money money money .. Snowden is a hero
convincing you wasn’t on my to-do list.
dispelling your bullsh!t was. and we’ve done that.
Helen Dixon should resign.
“European and US officials have already been trying to nut out a new transatlantic data transfer deal to replace the safe harbour regime, but no agreement has been struck.”
Ah, so in actual fact this will be a very short lived victory.
have your say