The fact that they are willing to comply with mandatory reporting when it is the law,
It seems to be the rule that when you are a victim of a crime or report a crime that you witness, you get entangled in the legal proceedings. Reporting a crime creates legal problems for the person reporting. It is not so clear cut to go and report crimes to the authorities. If a person can legally avail himself to counsel, that may be a defense from the legal consequences and problems that can result from reporting a crime. What a person chooses to do on his own though is up to the person and reap benefits or consequences.
J W elders are functionaries of the JW church entity and are required to follow orders—sort of speak . If they don’t want to, they are acting outside their authority. It seems that the JW policy is for their church officials to report crimes to their legal department. This means that the church and elders involved in the incident are legally represented by counsel— but wouldn’t shield the elder from personal liability but that’s why he went to a lawyer to begin with. The law firm also may be liable because they are required to do what the law mandates. For example, if a person goes to a lawyer to confess a crime or report a crime doesn’t release him of liability because he informed his lawyer. The law firm is also required to do things without breaking laws.
The only issue here is if the WT doing things relating to mandatory reporting without breaking the law. The Courts also have jurisdiction over natural justice relating to unclean hands, unfairness, deceptiveness, misrepresentations that results in injury to someone if someone is using the law to harm others. But all this is legal and not moral. The law doesn’t govern good and bad. An example of this is legal se$ual conduct or legal a*ortions that a lot of people find shocking and offensive and immoral and wrong—but very legal. JW like everyone else are not above the rule of secular law but if the only issue with mandatory reporting is your moral standard vs JW what can the Courts do?
Based on 1A people can ridicule and bring public awareness about policies —which is bad publicity. The institution may as a result be pressured to change but if it is a core belief or elemental on how things are done it will remain the same. How many people are pressured to change their immoral conduct because of 1A preaching to them about it? Just a thought.
Ultimately, children need to be protected and the Courts and the law have that power so that people don’t use the law resulting in helpless children being abused.