Article
28/6/2010
Pedophilia, the U.S. Supreme Court:
"No immunity for the Vatican"
"No immunity for the Vatican"
NEW YORK
The Supreme Court puts the Pope in check: although mostly Catholics, the Constitutional Court of the United States paved the way for a lawsuit that could theoretically take the stand witnesses Benedict XVI and the heads of the Holy See and the Vatican to force compensation millionaires.
deciding not to consider the request of the Vatican on the case "Anonymous against the Holy See" the courts have postponed the decision to a court in Oregon if the Vatican should incur liability for the actions of pedophile priests. The abuses at the center of the case date back to 1965. The priest in question, Andrew Ronan, died in 1992.
The Vatican had asked the Court to exempt the Holy See from the trial by invoking sovereign immunity granted to foreign states under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, the preserve on which it was expressed welcomed the Obama administration.
This law provides for exceptions: one of these is aimed at employees of a foreign state. The Court of Appeal, in the "Anonymous against the Holy See, had accepted the plea acknowledging that Father Ronan was transferred several times in the fifties and sixties from Ireland to Chicago and then to Portland, could this be considered an employee Vatican.
"The action of the Supreme Court is a bold answer to the prayers of thousands of victims of sexual harassment of priests who finally have a chance of justice," said Jeff Anderson, a lawyer who accuses the Holy See on behalf of a man who asked to remain anonymous and who claims he was molested by Ronan when he was 15.
Disappointed Jeffrey Lena, an attorney of the Holy See would have preferred to be acknowledged that the immunity level of the Supreme Court. According to Lena, however, today's decision "does not mean that we were in error in the interpretation of the law. The courts of Washington have estimated that the case, for now, did not deserve to be examined at their level. They would not choose this case as a vehicle to clarify the law on this point. "
"Anonymous against the Holy See" is now returning to the Court District of Oregon and the discussion will concentrate Ronan was on the theory that an official of the Vatican. An argument "untenable", according to Lena, "The Holy See does not pay the salary of the priest, neither its board nor exercises daily control on his work. Ronan was a priest of the Order of Friar Servants of Mary. Its very existence was unknown to the Vatican until after the events in question. "
The lawsuit will travel a path parallel to another cause, "McBryan against the Holy See," in which lawyers have accused the Vatican asked him to bring the Pope to the bar. This week Lena opposed the request by calling the immunity law and arguing that a witness the Pope in a U.S. court "would encourage foreign courts to order the depositions of the President of the United States in cases such as those of the CIA renditions," the secret transfers of terrorism suspects after the September 11 massacres
The Supreme Court puts the Pope in check: although mostly Catholics, the Constitutional Court of the United States paved the way for a lawsuit that could theoretically take the stand witnesses Benedict XVI and the heads of the Holy See and the Vatican to force compensation millionaires.
deciding not to consider the request of the Vatican on the case "Anonymous against the Holy See" the courts have postponed the decision to a court in Oregon if the Vatican should incur liability for the actions of pedophile priests. The abuses at the center of the case date back to 1965. The priest in question, Andrew Ronan, died in 1992.
The Vatican had asked the Court to exempt the Holy See from the trial by invoking sovereign immunity granted to foreign states under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, the preserve on which it was expressed welcomed the Obama administration.
This law provides for exceptions: one of these is aimed at employees of a foreign state. The Court of Appeal, in the "Anonymous against the Holy See, had accepted the plea acknowledging that Father Ronan was transferred several times in the fifties and sixties from Ireland to Chicago and then to Portland, could this be considered an employee Vatican.
"The action of the Supreme Court is a bold answer to the prayers of thousands of victims of sexual harassment of priests who finally have a chance of justice," said Jeff Anderson, a lawyer who accuses the Holy See on behalf of a man who asked to remain anonymous and who claims he was molested by Ronan when he was 15.
Disappointed Jeffrey Lena, an attorney of the Holy See would have preferred to be acknowledged that the immunity level of the Supreme Court. According to Lena, however, today's decision "does not mean that we were in error in the interpretation of the law. The courts of Washington have estimated that the case, for now, did not deserve to be examined at their level. They would not choose this case as a vehicle to clarify the law on this point. "
"Anonymous against the Holy See" is now returning to the Court District of Oregon and the discussion will concentrate Ronan was on the theory that an official of the Vatican. An argument "untenable", according to Lena, "The Holy See does not pay the salary of the priest, neither its board nor exercises daily control on his work. Ronan was a priest of the Order of Friar Servants of Mary. Its very existence was unknown to the Vatican until after the events in question. "
The lawsuit will travel a path parallel to another cause, "McBryan against the Holy See," in which lawyers have accused the Vatican asked him to bring the Pope to the bar. This week Lena opposed the request by calling the immunity law and arguing that a witness the Pope in a U.S. court "would encourage foreign courts to order the depositions of the President of the United States in cases such as those of the CIA renditions," the secret transfers of terrorism suspects after the September 11 massacres
0 comments:
Post a Comment