A Jehovah's Witness Bible (file photo). Photo: RNZ / Cole Eastham-Farrelly
Lawyers representing the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care have argued that Elders of the Jehovah's Witnesses Church exercised a level of control over the congregation that allowed them access to children.
A hearing brought by the church to exempt itself from the inquiry is entering its second day in Wellington High Court today.
The church has argued it was beyond the inquiry's scope on grounds that it did not operate institutions of care and the inquiry had uncovered no evidence of abuse in that context.
Counsel for the attorney general said the hearing was an attempt to have the church's involvement "frozen in time" ahead of the inquiry's findings.
They said releasing the church would contradict the inquiry's undertaking to map the "nature and extent" of abuse in care in New Zealand.
Yesterday, lawyers acting for the church said it did not operate institutions that took children, young persons or vulnerable adults into care.
They said that only a third of the statements made to the inquiry by survivors alleging abuse involved church-appointed Elders and each of these had occurred in private settings rather than formal structures of care.
Lawyer Sarah Jerebine described a 13-year-old girl abused by an Elder while on a family holiday as an example being beyond the inquiry's scope as it occurred in a family setting.
Counsel for the Inquiry argued today that statements made to the Royal Commission contained evidence of abuse perpetrated by the status and authority conferred to Elders of the church.
During yesterday's proceedings, Justice Rebecca Ellis was critical of the overly complicated outlaying of the church's case. Today she quipped she had already worn out her highlighter pen during the church's submissions.
She said the 17 points put forward by the church on the first day of submissions could have been distilled into four essential points.
On the second day of proceedings, counsel addressed those points grouped into four core arguments.
They were the interpretation of the terms of 'care' in the inquiry, an asserted lack of evidence concerning abuse within that context, bias in the inquiry's focus and a challenge to the legality of an amendment made to include 'other faith-based institutions' within the scope of the inquiry.
Lawyers for the attorney general pointed out the church had received only two notices to produce documents from the inquiry, one of which had been withdrawn.
This meant the church had been subject to the least number of requests to provide information that any other faith-based institution cooperating with the inquiry.
The Jehovah's Witnesses were the only faith-based institution in the country to legally challenge their involvement in the inquiry.
Counsel for the attorney general said if the court upheld the church's arguments concerning a lack of evidence future inquiries would be left open to challenges being brought against their work as they proceeded.
Former Jehovah's Witness and website SaySorry.org co-founder Lara Kaput had travelled from Australia to attend the hearings.
She said the lengths the church was going to counter the inquiry's efforts made her ask what they had to hide.
"If you didn't have any child abuse, why wouldn't you want the world to know, and be a part of the Royal Commission?"
She said in her experience of the church any argument that families were enabled to counter the will of Elders was false.
"All of the Elders have authority over the children. You can never stand up to the leaders and expect to be allowed to remain in 'good standing' as they say.
"They will shun you and exclude you from the congregation which includes your family. So it's extremely dangerous for anyone to stand up against them for their own mental health."