The Lisa Maria Foundation has strongly criticised a decision not to take canonical action against Fr Michael Said after Gozo Bishop Anton Teuma confirmed the priest had influenced a family to accept money rather than report the alleged sexual abuse of their minor daughter.In a statement issued on Saturday, the Foundation said it was “further shocked” by Teuma’s announcement, arguing that the absence of criminal wrongdoing does not remove the ethical and safeguarding concerns surrounding the priest’s actions.“Even if his actions were not found to be illegal, that does not minimise how unethical they were,” the Foundation said.The controversy dates back to reports earlier this year concerning allegations that Said had encouraged a family to accept money and remain silent rather than report the alleged rape and abuse of their daughter.According to the Foundation, Teuma has now confirmed that the priest did influence the family to accept the money, while stressing that Said was not involved in the alleged abuse itself and was not found guilty of any offence.The Bishop also confirmed that no canonical action would be taken against the priest.However, the Foundation argued that safeguarding responsibilities extend beyond whether someone’s actions cross the threshold of criminality.It described as “deeply insulting” to abuse survivors and their families any suggestion that the priest had always acted with integrity, given his acknowledged involvement in influencing how the family dealt with the allegations.The Foundation also raised concerns about what it described as a wider lack of understanding surrounding safeguarding, particularly when it comes to delayed reporting and the way institutions respond to allegations of child abuse.It acknowledged Teuma’s statement that Said would not make the same decision today, but argued that this does not erase what happened at the time.“So we ask, what consequence does such a decision carry?” the Foundation said.It stressed that safeguarding does not only concern the person accused of committing abuse, but also the responsibilities of people in positions of trust when allegations involving children are brought to their attention.“Any act that influences, discourages, delays, or diverts reporting can have serious consequences,” it said.The Foundation concluded by arguing that Maltese society remains too lenient in its response to child abuse, whether that involves abuse itself or attempts to cover up, excuse, ignore or divert allegations from proper reporting.“Safeguarding is everyone’s responsibility,” it said, insisting that positions of trust or power should never be used to “excuse, minimise, or delay action” when allegations of child abuse emerge.What do you make of this?•