Kenja and the National Redress Scheme
As an organisation committed to the well-being, safety and personal growth of people, including children, we oppose all human degradation including sexual abuse. We empathise profoundly with all victims of sexual abuse. Kenja rejects any claim that sexual abuse of children has ever taken place at this organisation. While acknowledging the vital imperatives behind the National Redress Scheme, we do not consider it appropriate that we join in circumstances where genuine claims against us do not exist. Accordingly, Kenja will not be cajoled or threatened into joining the Scheme.
Published here are our replies to NSW Attorney General Mr Mark Speakman and Senator Anne Ruston requesting that we join the National Redress Scheme
“The issue of institutional failings cannot be pre-determined independently of ascertaining whether allegations are true. The principle of the presumption of innocence is important and should not be readily abandoned even in the furtherance of the humane and responsible objectives of the National Redress Scheme.”
Kenja Communication was not the subject of any comment or reference in the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse.
On 11 November 2020 the Solicitor General of Tasmania stated publicly that it was inappropriate that public money be paid in the form of compensation to settle claims of alleged sexual abuse without proper evidence and investigation. We agree with that statement, and also its application to the funds of private organisations.
Our democratic rights
Our position on the National Redress Scheme is also adopted on the basis of our right to free speech and association;
"Morals and sound policy require that the state should not violate the conscience of the individual. All our history gives confirmation to the view that liberty of conscience has a moral and social value which makes it worthy of preservation at the hands of the state. So deep in its significance and vital, indeed, is it to the integrity of man's moral and spiritual nature that nothing short of the self-preservation of the state should warrant its violation; and it may well be questioned whether the state which preserves its life by a settled policy of violation of the conscience of the individual will not in fact ultimately lose it by the process."
Fiske Stone
Former Chief Justice
US Supreme Court
1919
 | Kenja Communication letter
regarding the “National Redress Scheme”
|
20 October 2020
Dear Attorney General,
National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse (The Scheme)
We refer to correspondence received from you on 16 October 2020.
We are aware of The Scheme and as an organisation accept unreservedly that sexual abuse is not just a crime against the person but is also a crime that attacks the social fabric of a nation. We are aware of the horrific abuse established in the evidence in the Royal Commission, and the moral imperative that society takes steps to address such abuses, and that victims be compensated.
We deny that sexual abuse has ever taken place at this organisation.
There were lengthy legal proceedings involving allegations against the co-founder of this organisation, Mr Kenneth Dyers, where Mr Dyers was exonerated by the court system and there were no convictions. Those proceedings took place over 10 years between 1993 and 2002.
There were later additional allegations however Mr Dyers was declared unfit for trial and consequently there were no court proceedings in relation to those claims. As with the original claims, these allegations were also made in a specific context and chronology relating to disputes with 2 families who were embroiled in conflict with our organisation leading to animosity and a desire for revenge.
One of the families was told to leave the organisation because of inappropriate behaviour of the father towards his daughter. The other family context involved a marriage and family break-up, leading to animosity toward the organisation by some family members involved. Allegations of sexual abuse that were levelled against Mr Dyers were false, malicious and motivated by hostility and conflict.
Our organisation believes that sexual abuse is abhorrent, and we would not countenance it taking place in the context of our organisation’s activities. It is the antithesis of the personal growth and freedom of the individual which we seek to promote and foster as an organisation.
We do not accept that there are genuine claims in this regard, and for that reason we do not propose to participate in The Scheme. We reject the proposition that in the circumstances, our conduct is reprehensible, which has been asserted. We consider we are acting appropriately and responsibly in our community obligations.
Regrettably over the last month many high profile people supportive of our organisation have been vilified with abusive emails in what appears to be a “naming and shaming campaign”. People who were witnesses in earlier legal proceedings have also been subjected to abusive and harassing hate mail. We consider this behaviour deeply repugnant in a civilized society.
As Attorney General, that is the chief legal officer of the State, you will no doubt feel revulsion, in a system based on the rule of law, at the notion of guilt by accusation alone. The issue of institutional failings cannot be pre-determined independently of ascertaining whether allegations are true. The principle of the presumption of innocence is important and should not be readily abandoned even in the furtherance of the humane and responsible objectives of the National Redress Scheme. We are a responsible, social- and community-oriented organisation, which strongly protects the well-being of all involved in our activities, and especially children.
For your information, we attach a copy of our long-standing published Ethics.
We thank you for writing to us on this important matter and we hope that we have reasonably set out our explanation for not joining the National Redress Scheme.
Respectfully,
Janice R Hamilton
Kenja Communication
| Kenja Communication letter
regarding the “National Redress Scheme”
|
29 June 2020
Dear Senator Ruston,
National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse (The Scheme)
We refer to correspondence received from you on 15 May 2020 and also, in conjunction with the Prime Minister, on 26 June 2020.
We are aware of The Scheme and as an organisation accept unreservedly that sexual abuse is not just a crime against the person but is also a crime that attacks the social fabric of a nation, as stated in the letter of 26 June 2020.
We deny that sexual abuse has ever taken place at this organisation.
There were lengthy legal proceedings involving allegations against the co-founder of this organisation, Mr Kenneth Dyers, where Mr Dyers was exonerated by the court system and there were no convictions.
Those proceedings took place over 10 years between 1993 and 2002.
Our organisation believes that sexual abuse is abhorrent, and we would not countenance it taking place in the context of our organisation’s activities. It is the antithesis of the personal growth and freedom of the individual which we seek to promote and foster as an organisation.
We do not accept that there are genuine claims in this regard, and for that reason we do not propose to participate in The Scheme. We reject the claim that in the circumstances, our conduct is reprehensible. We consider we are acting appropriately and responsibly in our community obligations, and in a society based on the rule of law.
Respectfully,
Janice R Hamilton
Kenja Communication
