In the future, when we are discussing the present controversies with people, we must be well-informed, ready to explain.
From the gentlemanly Sandro Magister comes this:
After an Accusation, Here is What Happens at the Vatican
The guidelines of the congregation for the doctrine of the faith on the steps to be taken when sexual abuse against minors is alleged
by Sandro Magister
ROME, April 13, 2010 – As of yesterday, the document reproduced below has been available on the Vatican website, summarizing the procedures in use for a few years in the Catholic Church in cases of sexual abuse against minors by persons in holy orders.
By minors is meant persons under the age of 18, while by acts of pedophilia is meant abuses committed against children who have not reached puberty. [What is missing here is the distinction about ephebophilia.]
Of the approximately three thousand allegations sent to the congregation for the doctrine of the faith from 2001 until today, of abuse against minors committed over the past fifty years, the cases of pedophilia strictly speaking are 10 percent of the total. 60 percent of the cases are of sexual attraction for adolescents of the same sex, [ephebophilia, right?] while the remaining 30 percent involve relations with teenage girls.
Most of the cases examined have ended with administrative and disciplinary sanctions against the accused: a faster and more effective procedure than an actual legal trial. [Because of the changes to procedures which Card. Ratzinger strove to have implemented.]
For reporting abuse to the civil authorities, the Holy See orders that local laws be followed. This means that in countries with an Anglo-Saxon legal culture and in France, criminal charges are obligatory. Where this is not the case, the Holy See encourages the victims to approach the courts themselves.
The changes announced in the last paragraph of the document specifically concern the abolition of the statute of limitations, which since 2001 has been 10 years, starting from the victim’s eighteenth birthday. Even now, however, the statute of limitations is not binding, and allegations are also accepted for actions that occurred longer ago.
So here is the text of the guidelines, in its official English version:
Guide to Understanding Basic CDF Procedures concerning Sexual Abuse Allegations
The applicable law is the Motu Proprio "Sacramentorum sanctitatis tutela" (MP SST) of 30 April 2001 together with the 1983 Code of Canon Law.
This is an introductory guide which may be helpful to lay persons and non-canonists.
A: Preliminary Procedures
The local diocese investigates every allegation of sexual abuse of a minor by a cleric.
If the allegation has a semblance of truth [then] the case is referred to the CDF. The local bishop transmits all the necessary information to the CDF and expresses his opinion on the procedures to be followed and the measures to be adopted in the short and long term.
Civil law concerning reporting of crimes to the appropriate authorities should always be followed.
During the preliminary stage and until the case is concluded, the bishop may impose precautionary measures to safeguard the community, including the victims. Indeed, the local bishop always retains power to protect children by restricting the activities of any priest in his diocese. This is part of his ordinary authority, which he is encouraged to exercise to whatever extent is necessary to assure that children do not come to harm, and this power can be exercised at the bishop’s discretion before, during and after any canonical proceeding.
B: Procedures authorized by the CDF
The CDF studies the case presented by the local bishop and also asks for supplementary information where necessary.
The CDF has a number of options:
B1 Penal Processes
The CDF may authorize the local bishop to conduct a judicial penal trial before a local Church tribunal. Any appeal in such cases would eventually be lodged to a tribunal of the CDF. [If there is a local trial, the appeal goes to the CDF.]
The CDF may authorize the local bishop to conduct an administrative penal process before a delegate of the local bishop assisted by two assessors. The accused priest is called to respond to the accusations and to review the evidence. [This is streamlined.] The accused has a right to present recourse to the CDF against a decree condemning him to a canonical penalty. The decision of the Cardinals members of the CDF is final. [It is unclear to me if this means the plenary meeting of the Cardinal members of the Congregation, or the smaller groups which meet regularly during the year. Also, you would think that the POPE has the final word. But this is the way it is set up under the direction of this Pope. Also, you should know that a Congregation isn’t just a building: it is the body of the members appointed who are gathered together "congregated". This includes Cardinals and also other prelates from around the world. The members in Rome have regular meeetings. This is why these curial appointments, such as that of Archbishop Burke, is important. Some Cardinal or other prelate might come to Rome once in a while, but those who are there have their influence in the actual day to day workings of the other dicasteries to which he is appointed. Archbp. Burke is the head of the Segnatura, but he belongs also, for example, to the Congregation for Bishops. But I digress.]
Should the cleric be judged guilty, both judicial and administrative penal processes can condemn a cleric to a number of canonical penalties, the most serious of which is dismissal from the clerical state. The question of damages can also be treated directly during these procedures. [It is unclear to me what these "damages" might include. I am not sure that this is monetary.]
B2 Cases referred directly to the Holy Father
In very grave cases where a civil criminal trial has found the cleric guilty of sexual abuse of minors or where the evidence is overwhelming, the CDF may choose to take the case directly to the Holy Father with the request that the Pope issue a decree of "ex officio" dismissal from the clerical state. There is no canonical remedy against such a papal decree.
The CDF also brings to the Holy Father requests by accused priests who, cognizant of their crimes, ask to be dispensed from the obligation of the priesthood [That is the best way to express this: dispensed from the obligations that come from being a cleric.] and want to return to the lay state. The Holy Father grants these requests for the good of the Church ("pro bono Ecclesiae"). [Remember this phrase and this context when people criticize then Prefect Cardinal Ratzinger for speaking about "the good of the Church" when dealing with the case of the priest in California who was requesting to be dispensed from the clerical state.]
B3 Disciplinary Measures
In cases where the accused priest has admitted to his crimes and has accepted to live a life of prayer and penance, the CDF authorizes the local bishop to issue a decree prohibiting or restricting the public ministry of such a priest. Such decrees are imposed through a penal precept which would entail a canonical penalty for a violation of the conditions of the decree, not excluding dismissal from the clerical state. Administrative recourse to the CDF is possible against such decrees. The decision of the CDF is final.
C: Revision of MP SST
For some time the CDF has undertaken a revision of some of the articles of Motu Proprio "Sacramentorum Sanctitatis tutela," in order to update the said Motu Proprio of 2001 [NB:] in the light of special faculties granted to the CDF by Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI. The proposed modifications under discussion will not change the above-mentioned procedures (A, B1-B3).
Now you know something more about the procedures.