The belief that a deity exists in multidimensional space and time and claims to be a direct observer of the millions of crimes and yet refuses to come forward, while protecting, directing and setting examples that it uses to obstruct justice and to deny the truth.

No belief in any deity—multidimensional, omniscient, or otherwise—can legally or morally license the obstruction of justice, the silencing of crime victims, or the denial of their human rights. Your description frames a very specific theological claim (a deity that watches every crime in “multidimensional space and time” yet chooses non-intervention, protection of perpetrators, and active obstruction of truth). That belief itself is 100 % protected as a personal conviction. But any real-world conduct that flows from it and harms victims is not.

1. The belief is protected; the harmful conduct is not

• Holding the belief (forum internum) remains absolute under every major human-rights instrument: you can believe the deity is an eyewitness who refuses to testify, that it “protects and directs” abusers, or that divine silence is part of a larger plan. Australian law (Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) s 20, Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Act exemptions, etc.), the ICCPR Art 18, and equivalent statutes treat this exactly the same as any other religious or philosophical view.
• Acting on it (manifesting it by teaching, practice, or policy) hits the same hard limit as before: it can be restricted when it interferes with “the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.” If a priest, imam, elder, or believer cites this deity’s non-intervention to:
  • discourage a victim from reporting rape or child abuse (“God is watching but chooses silence; so should you”),
  • refuse to hand over evidence in a criminal investigation (“divine direction overrides secular court”),
  • pressure a victim into forgiveness or secrecy (“it’s the deity’s example”),
  • or lobby for legal exemptions that shield institutions from mandatory reporting, then those are prosecutable acts of obstruction, conspiracy, or child endangerment. Courts have said so repeatedly.

2. How this exact belief pattern has been used historically to deny victims’ rights

The mechanism you describe is not new; it is the classic “divine hiddenness + divine sovereignty” argument repurposed as institutional cover:

• Theological cover for non-reporting: For centuries, many faiths taught that an all-seeing God is the ultimate witness and judge, yet simultaneously instructed believers not to “bring scandal” or to leave justice to the deity. This produced the same outcome you name: millions of victims (child sexual abuse in churches, forced marriages, honour-based violence, institutional abuse) were told their suffering was observed but not to be publicly remedied by humans. The belief that the deity “refuses to come forward” was turned into a reason for humans to refuse as well.
• “God’s plan” or “divine example” defence: When perpetrators or institutions claim the deity itself “protects and directs” them, or sets an example of silence, this is simply a religious version of the “just following orders” defence. Modern inquiries (Australia’s Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, UK Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse, US grand-jury reports) documented thousands of cases where exactly this reasoning delayed justice for decades.
• Multidimensional / omniscient framing does not change the law: Whether the deity is described in ancient scripture or in modern terms (“multidimensional space and time”), the legal test is identical. No jurisdiction grants a special exemption because the believer uses fancier cosmology. The moment the belief is used to obstruct a police investigation, destroy evidence, intimidate witnesses, or deny victims civil remedies, it becomes actionable.

3. Why the belief can feel like a permanent shield—and why it is not

• Political and cultural deference: In practice, authorities sometimes hesitate to challenge religious institutions because of the “protected belief” label. That hesitation is a policy failure, not a legal requirement. Australia’s mandatory reporting laws, removal of religious exemptions for child abuse reporting, and the National Redress Scheme were direct corrections to exactly this problem.
• Victim-blaming dressed as theology: Telling victims “the deity saw it and chose silence” can be psychologically devastating and can discourage reporting. But that is emotional coercion, not a protected manifestation of belief. It is treated by courts as grooming, intimidation, or psychological abuse when directed at children or vulnerable people.
• No “centuries-long” immunity: Every major reform—abolition of slavery, criminalisation of FGM, mandatory clergy reporting, statutes of limitation extensions for historic abuse—has overridden the “deity’s will” or “divine non-intervention” argument once the harm to victims became politically undeniable.

Bottom line (humanist perspective)

A belief that an all-observing deity refuses to come forward as a witness does not create a moral or legal safe harbour for anyone who uses that belief to obstruct justice or deny victims their day in court. The victims’ right to truth, safety, and redress is not subordinate to any cosmological claim. If religious institutions or individuals have spent centuries treating divine silence as a reason for human silence, that is a choice they made—not a requirement of human-rights law. Secular justice systems exist precisely to step into the gap the deity allegedly leaves.

If you are pointing to a specific doctrine, institution, or recent case in Australia (or elsewhere) where this “multidimensional observer who obstructs” reasoning is being invoked to shield abusers, give me the details and I can examine the exact legal or policy angle. The general principle, however, remains unchanged: belief is free; using it to deny victims their rights is not.

While I understand the proposed lobbying method, in my view this simply further obstruction that has been added over time.

I want you to review the suggested lobbying method as it puts the onus on the victims to push for reform. I want you to explore direct and immediate action that can be taken by governments.

Describe for me other areas of governance that continue to obstruct justice for months and years when the role of government is to act immediately to prevent delay. Justice delayed this way is justice denied.

I agree with your critique of the lobbying route: it does place a heavy, ongoing burden on victims and survivors (or their advocates) to keep pushing for change that governments already have a core duty to deliver. Under Australia's human rights framework (including Queensland's Human Rights Act 2019) and the findings of the Royal Commission, the state has an affirmative obligation to protect people from harm and ensure timely access to justice. Treating reform as something victims must "lobby" for can itself feel like an added layer of obstruction — especially when the belief-based loopholes you describe have historically delayed accountability for decades. Victims should not have to campaign just to get the system to enforce laws that already exist.

Governments (state and federal) already possess direct, immediate executive and administrative powers to close gaps, speed up justice, and stop any protected-belief claim from shielding crime or institutional cover-ups. These do not require new legislation or years of consultation — they can be activated by ministers, departments, police, prosecutors, and regulators right now. Here is what is available in Queensland and nationally as of 2026: Immediate government actions possible without waiting for victims to lobby Rigorous enforcement and prosecution of existing mandatory reporting laws Queensland already requires ministers of religion (and others in faith-based roles) to report suspected child sexual abuse, with no exemption for the seal of confession (law in force since 2020). Failure to report is a criminal offence. The government can immediately: Direct Queensland Police and the Director of Public Prosecutions to prioritise investigations and prosecutions of non-reporting by clergy or institutions. Launch targeted compliance audits of religious organisations to check internal policies against the law. Publicly report on enforcement numbers annually so failures are visible and addressed. Accelerate institutional liability and redress processing The Queensland Government can fast-track the Civil Liability (Holding Institutions Accountable for Child Abuse) Amendment Bill 2026 (currently before Parliament) through emergency sitting if needed, or issue ministerial guidelines to close any remaining High Court loopholes on vicarious liability. Direct the Department of Justice to allocate extra resources to the National Redress Scheme and state civil claims processes so backlogs are cleared in months, not years (e.g., dedicated fast-track teams for institutional abuse cases).

Expand the Reportable Conduct Scheme (commencing July 2026 for more organisations) with immediate interim oversight and mandatory reporting to the Queensland Family and Child Commission.

Executive directives and resource surges

The Premier and Attorney-General can issue policy directives to courts, police, and child safety agencies to treat all institutional or belief-related abuse cases as priority matters (similar to how domestic violence or terrorism cases are fast-tracked). This includes early allocation of prosecutors, specialist judges, and case management to prevent delays.

Immediate budget reallocations: redirect funds to hire more child-protection investigators, specialist sexual-offence prosecutors, and victim-support workers — exactly as governments have done in response to past inquiries.

Stand up a short-term taskforce (weeks, not years) with powers to audit religious and other institutions for compliance with Child Safe Organisations standards (already law since 2025) and report directly to Cabinet.

Regulatory and oversight actions Strengthen working-with-children checks and child-safe standards enforcement through the Blue Card system — immediate suspensions or conditions on non-compliant organisations.

The Queensland Human Rights Commission or Child Safety Department can issue binding guidelines clarifying that no belief (multidimensional deity or otherwise) can justify obstruction of justice, and enforce them via complaints mechanisms.

These steps have precedent: governments have used executive power to roll out the National Redress Scheme, remove most confession exemptions nationwide, and respond to the Royal Commission far faster than lobbying alone would have achieved.

Other areas of governance where delays routinely obstruct justice (justice delayed = justice denied) Your point about systemic delays is spot-on — this problem is not unique to belief-based institutional abuse. Governments often allow months or years of inertia in areas where immediate action is both possible and morally required. Common examples in Australia (including Queensland) include:

Family law and domestic/family violence cases: Proceedings frequently drag on for 1–3+ years. Abusers exploit delays through repeated applications (a form of "systems abuse" or coercive control), while victims and children remain in unsafe situations. Magistrates' courts handle the bulk of protection orders, yet backlogs persist despite known risks of harm or even fatalities. Criminal prosecutions for sexual offences and child abuse: Pre-trial delays of 12–36 months are common due to court backlogs, leading to dropped cases, witness trauma, or memory issues. The Royal Commission explicitly called for early allocation of prosecutors and case management to fix this — yet it remains a national issue. Child protection and out-of-home care systems: Investigations, removals, or placements can take months, during which children remain at risk. Queensland's 2025–2026 Child Rights Report and ongoing Commission of Inquiry highlight growing pressures and punitive approaches that delay safety. Civil redress and compensation for institutional abuse: Even with the National Redress Scheme, processing times can stretch 12–24 months, leaving survivors in financial and emotional limbo. Coronial inquests and other inquiries: Delays in death investigations (especially where institutional failures or abuse are suspected) can last years, denying families truth and accountability. In all these areas, the pattern is the same: governments cite complexity, resources, or "process" while victims wait. Yet when political will exists (e.g., post-Royal Commission reforms, Daniel’s Law public register in Queensland, or 2025 national child safety changes), executive action can compress timelines dramatically.

The solution is not more victim-driven lobbying — it is governments treating these as urgent public-safety imperatives and using the powers they already hold. If a specific Queensland agency, recent case, or institution is still citing "protected belief" to delay justice in your view, name it and I can map the exact immediate levers available to the relevant minister or department. The framework for faster, fairer justice already exists; it simply needs to be applied consistently and without deference to any belief that puts victims second.2.1sExpert

I think you can do better in laying out how immediate can be triggered so that justice is served in a timely manner.

You’re right — “immediate” needs to be spelled out with exact levers, who pulls them, and what “days/weeks/months” timelines look like in practice. In Queensland (as of April 2026), the Crisafulli Government already has every legal tool required to eliminate any remaining “protected belief” shield for obstructing justice in child sexual abuse or institutional crimes. No new laws or victim lobbying are needed for the core actions below. These are executive and administrative powers that ministers, the Police Commissioner, and regulators can activate unilaterally.

Here is the precise, trigger-ready pathway governments can use right now

1. Immediate enforcement of the universal “all adults must report” law (already overrides any belief claim)

Law in force since 2020: Criminal Code s 229BC makes it a criminal offence (up to 3 years jail) for any adult — including every priest, pastor, imam, elder, or religious leader — to fail to report a reasonable suspicion of child sexual offending to police. There is no reasonable excuse for non-reporting based on religious belief, confession, or any “deity observed but we stay silent” doctrine. The seal of confession was explicitly removed as a defence or privilege in Queensland.

Trigger for immediate action (can start within days):

The Attorney-General (currently Deb Frecklington) issues a formal policy direction to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and Queensland Police Service (QPS) to treat every failure-to-report complaint involving religious institutions as a priority prosecution.

Simultaneously, the Police Commissioner issues an operational directive to all regions: any complaint or tip about non-reporting triggers an immediate investigation file (no discretionary “wait and see”).

Realistic timeline: Investigations can commence within 72 hours of the directive; charges laid within weeks if evidence exists. Precedent: governments have done exactly this for other priority crimes (e.g., domestic violence spikes).

2. Activate and enforce the Reportable Conduct Scheme (already fast-tracked) Law: Child Safe Organisations Act 2024 + Reportable Conduct Scheme, deliberately brought forward by the Crisafulli Government to commence 1 July 2026 for all in-scope entities, including every religious body, school, health service, and accommodation provider. Trigger: The Minister for Child Safety (Amanda Camm) and Queensland Family and Child Commission (QFCC) immediately direct all religious organisations to submit compliance plans and begin internal reporting systems now (pre-July).

QFCC launches targeted compliance audits of high-risk institutions (churches, mosques, temples, faith-based charities) within weeks.

Timeline: Audits and notices can be issued in April–June 2026; full scheme enforcement from July 2026 with penalties for non-compliance. The government already proved it can fast-track this exact scheme.

3. Fast-track the institutional liability “loophole” fix

Current status (April 2026): Civil Liability (Holding Institutions Accountable for Child Abuse) Amendment Bill 2026 is before Parliament to close the post-High Court loophole that still lets some institutions dodge vicarious liability.

Trigger for immediate action:

The Premier (David Crisafulli) or Attorney-General declares the bill urgent and calls an emergency parliamentary sitting or uses procedural urgency to pass it within days or weeks. Once passed, the Department of Justice issues immediate guidelines to courts and victims’ lawyers confirming institutions are liable.

Timeline: Legislation can move from introduction to royal assent in under a month when treated as urgent (precedent exists for child-safety bills).

4. Surge resources and create priority case streams (no new money needed — just reallocation)

Triggers (can be done by ministerial letter tomorrow):

Premier/Attorney-General directs extra prosecutors, specialist sexual-offence judges, and case managers to clear institutional-abuse backlogs.

Child Safety and QFCC get ring-fenced funding surges for rapid investigations.

National Redress Scheme (QLD-administered component): request federal partners to apply the existing “priority for elderly/terminally ill” fast-track to all institutional-abuse survivors, aiming for decisions in 3–6 months instead of 12–18.

Timeline: Case prioritisation can begin affecting new matters within weeks; backlog reduction visible in 3–6 months.

These are not hypothetical. The same government has already used executive speed to fast-track the Reportable Conduct Scheme and bring forward the Child Safety Commission of Inquiry recommendations to May 2026. The only missing piece is political will to treat “belief-based obstruction” exactly like any other obstruction of justice.

Why this directly dismantles the belief shield you described

Any claim that a “multidimensional deity observed the crimes but chose silence/protection” is now legally irrelevant. The law says: you saw it, you report it, or you go to jail. Enforcement of the existing statutes is the direct, immediate route — no victim has to lobby for their own rights to be respected.

If a specific institution, recent non-reporting incident, or backlog in a particular court is what you’re seeing, name it (even generally) and I can map the exact email addresses, ministerial portfolios, and template wording for the directives that would force action within days. The mechanisms exist today; they simply need to be pulled. Justice delayed is justice denied — and Queensland’s own laws already say the delay must end.

If a specific institution, recent non-reporting incident, or backlog in a particular court is what you’re seeing, name it and I can map the exact email addresses, ministerial portfolios, and template wording for the directives that would force action within days. The mechanisms exist today; they simply need to be pulled. Justice delayed is justice denied — and Queensland’s own laws already say the delay must end.

Others in this series

UPDATED *IMPORTANT: The Denial of Procedural Fairness through claims of Religious Protections or Freedom of Religion or its Beliefs V1
UPDATED *IMPORTANT: The Denial of Procedural Fairness through claims of Religious Protections or Freedom of Religion or its Beliefs V2
UPDATED *IMPORTANT: The Denial of Procedural Fairness through claims of Religious Protections or Freedom of Religion or its Beliefs V3
The Anatomy of Obstruction
The Anatomy of Obstruction - Part 2
Formal Submission to International Human Rights Bodies
Exploring the future for children - SOVEREIGNTY SEGMENT – COGNITIVE SOVEREIGNTY AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT
Cognitive Sovereignty and the Rights of the Child: A Pattern-Based Analysis of Cultural Imposition and Developmental Harm
Culture - Formal Submission
Obstruction of Procedural Fairness - A Simple Explanation of What Has Been Found
My Personal Sovereignty Statement
Coerced into lifelong bondage

Stand alone page: Formal Submission to International Human Rights Bodies

2023 Findings in Spain found that 0.6% of the population of Spain had been sexually abused by Roman Catholic priests and laity. Up to 50 million alive on any day who have been raped or abused by Catholic clergy &/or Catholic laity

Current world population is 8 billion - 0.6% = 48 million alive today who are likely to have been raped by Catholics globally.

The church protected the perpetrators, not the victims

"This is a matter for the church and I respect the internal judgements of the church. I don't stand outside the church and provide them with public lectures in terms of how they should behave. I've noted carefully what his Holiness has said in the United States. Obviously that was a source of great comfort and healing in the United States. I'm like all Australians very much looking forward to what the Pope has to say here in Australia as well, as I am to my own conversation with the Pope later this morning." Kevin Rudd, Prime Minister of Australia, 17 July 2008. more

If you found this information to be of assistance please don't forget to donate so that we can extend these information pages which are focused on providing knowledge and information to survivor/victims on their Human Rights with justice, compassion and empathy at the fore along with sound knowledge of Human Biology and Psychology, Human Evolution and Neuroscience. Information is not provided as legal or professional advice; it is provided as general information only and requires that you validate any information via your own legal or other professional service providers.

Wednesday, 22 June 2022 - I may not have this down syntax, word and letter perfect or with absolute precision in every aspect; however time and the evidence will show that I am closer to the truth than any religion has been or will likely be.
Let history be the standard by which that is measured.

Youtube - listen to Commissioner Bob Atkinson get it wrong - again
The Commissioner informs us that the clergy sexual abuse issue was all over and that it had only been a small statistical glitch around the year 2000. History shows this to have been a display of absolute ignorance on the issue ...

Makarrata : a better future for our children based on justice and self-determination. The Uluru Statement from the Heart. See Yours, mine and Australia's children. I acknowledge the Traditional People and their Ownership of Australia.

  Constitutional Reform     Human Rights     Living Constitution     Constitution Field Guide     Corruption      Whistleblowers     Medical Research     Clinical Trials   

Hegemony: The authority, dominance, and influence of one group, nation, or society over another group, nation, or society; typically through cultural, economic, or political means.

Recent:

#1054 Coerced into lifelong bondage

#1053 Legal and Human Rights Framework

#1052 Coerced into lifelong bondage

#1051 My Personal Sovereignty Statement

#1050 Obstruction of Procedural Fairness - A Simple Explanation of What Has Been Found

#1049 Culture - Formal Submission

Must reads on

#763 Estimating the numbers global

#826 RFG: Accountability and responsibility of charities in providing care and justice to abuse survivors

#756 RFG: Advancing Parliamentary Pathways for Facilitating Disassociation from the Roman Catholic Church

#50 Yours, mine and Australia's children

#116 Human Rights and survivors of childhood sexual abuse by clergy a farce in Australia

#142 How aware are Australians of the truth of the cover up of the sexual abuse of children in 2018?

#157 Australian Constitution Hijacked into Empowering Criminal Clergy

#825 RFG: Foreign state has harmful impact on Mental Health of many Australians

#818 RFG: Career Cougers, Angel protectors or just Private School Mums

#574 It's not a lot to ask when the Human Rights of children are at stake

Mother and baby home survivors on redress delay: 'They are playing a game of wait and die'
Consultants reported more than 520 conflicts of interest during audit of Australian aged care

2024 is the year of Survivor's High Court challenge of the legitimacy of the Catholic Church and its religion on the basis of its primary allegiance and obedience to a foreign state.

Were you like so many others born into a constitutionally protected God based death and rape culture?

About and bits

The FAQyMe Gene happily uses IP2Location.io IP geolocation web service.