ISKCON Ignores Lokanath's Committee Deadline

For comments, corrections, additional info -- send to:

 angel108b@yahoo.com 

LETTER TO LOKANATH CASE AD HOC PANEL MEMBERS

Hare Krishna Tamohara, Champakalata, Navin Shyam, Bhaktarupa, and Mahaman Prabhus,

As it is November 4th, and your examination of Lokanath's child molestation case started on August 25th, I imagine you are well on your way into looking at all aspects of the case, especially considering the panel was supposed to meet for 60 days. That point passed on October 24th, 11 days ago.

As has been stated repeatedly by myself and others, in ISKCON's own laws and mandates - the child abuse portion of the case should be handled by the ISKCON Child Protection Office. Any alleged abuse, past or present, goes to the CPO - whether it has been previously handled by other parties or not.  

The CPO is the last stop within ISKCON to look at a child abuse case, and they decide what restrictions are placed on the child abuser. No offense, but it really should not be your unprecedented GBC-appointed Ad Hoc Panel, who will be reporting to the GBC with your findings. It should be the independent Child Protection Office.

Anuttama Prabhu said in a 2016 ISKCON News article:

"Just as the judiciary is an independent organ of the government yet is established and maintained by the government, the CPO is an independent function within ISKCON, with overall policies established by the GBC. This is good, reasonable, and balanced governance."

Regarding the mishandling and cover-up of the Lokanath case over the last 30 years, this portion may be examined by non-CPO parties.  The mishandling of the case is beyond the scope of the CPO. That is something your Ad Hoc Panel can do, and is part of your mandate.

If you have not already, I encourage you to please contact:

DHIRA GOVINDA and IJYA - They can answer the question "Why did the GBC not let the Child Protection Office handle the Lokanath case when the CPO was formed?"  They started the ISKCON Child Protection Office in 1998, and directed it for six years.

(I suggested to Navin Shyam in July that you all speak with Dhira Govinda as he is a crucial person in why the GBC blocked the CPO from looking into this case.)

Dhira Govinda said the stock answer was “Well, we already dealt with this case years before the formation of the Child Protection Office (1998).” 

But there is also this whole thing with Dhira Govinda simply asking for the Lokanath case report, or document, to share with interested and concerned persons, and the GBC hemming and hawing, dodging, evading, deceiving, doing everything, except providing any sort of official document that the CPO could share with others - and this went on for years and years.

Even if it's true that ISKCON leadership had already handled the Lokanath case prior to the establishment of the CPO in 1998, ISKCON leadership had already dealt with many cases of alleged and confirmed child maltreatment. 

And, for NONE of those cases did the GBC direct the CPO, “Hands off…don’t touch this case…..” For example, as described in Report on the Bhaktivedanta Gurukula Village (April 1999), in 1991 -  Tosan Krsna, Adikarta, Bhaktarupa, and Dayarama Prabhus investigated and handled many cases of alleged and confirmed child abuse related to ISKCON Mayapur. “Many cases”- meaning, many perpetrators, and dozens of victims, and hundreds of incidents of child maltreatment.

Dhira Govinda said, "I state categorically that the efforts of Dayarama, Tosan Krsna, Adikarta, and Bhaktarupa, were at an exponentially higher level, in terms of competence and professional integrity, than the efforts of ISKCON leadership to deal with the case of Lokanatha Maharaja, pre-1998. So, then, how come the CPO didn’t receive directives from the GBC to not touch any amongst the many cases handled by Bhaktarupa, Adikarta, Dayarama and Tosan Krsna?"

CHAMPAKALATA - Ask her what her role or non-role was as CPO Director during 2010-2011 when Satya wrote her public statements, followed by Lokanath writing his admission letter, and Lokanath being brought in front of the GBC in a plenary session to acknowledge his abuse.

LILASUKA - Ask her about her role as the North American CPO Director while having Lokanath, a confirmed child abuser, lead a North American tour in 2019, headlining kirtan festivals, and doing initiations in temple rooms, while she had her hands tied behind her back, unable to say anything because as Dhira Govinda mentioned above - there was no official report or document from the ISKCON Child Protection Office placing restrictions on this confirmed child abuser.

KAMLESH KRISHNA and GANDHARVIKA - The current International CPO Directors who were given the Lokanath child molestation case in May 2021, and then had it taken away 5 days later, secretly, with no explanation or justification, can share their experience of being blocked by the GBC, and share why it's important that the Lokanath case be handled by the CPO, and what sort of ill precedent will occur if this does not happen.

If you have not already, I strongly encourage you to procure the full CAP Behavior Associates evaluation of Lokanath, which includes the victim report compiled by Yasoda (Diane Priolo).  Bir Krishna Goswami should have this, also possibly Badrinarayan Swami, Yasoda, Ravindra Svarupa, and Mukunda Goswami.

Your recommendation should be to hand the Lokanath abuse case back to the CPO (because that's why they were formed - by the GBC - to do). The scope of this GBC-appointed Ad Hoc Panel should be to do what the CPO can't. Your Panel should focus on cataloging the history of the GBC's involvement in Lokanath's child molestation case over the past 31 years, what went wrong, what went right, along with advice on how the GBC can learn from this and improve their processes and procedures in the future.

Please let me know if you have any questions about this case.  I have studied it in depth for 6 months.  I have looked at the documents available - multiple times - studied them, written about them, explained them to people, and have spoken with many parties involved in the case.  Please let me know if you have any questions whatsoever - where to find something, what something means, etc.  I am at your service.

Yours truly, 

S Dasi

ME Dasi: Once again, your letter summarizes the main issues succinctly. I hope the panel will take your advice with respect to the questions that urgently need to be asked.

PT Dasa: ISKCON is finished because the powerful ICC doesn't respect the GBC or the GBC panel. Even though it's obvious that Lokanath Swami shouldn't be a guru, the GBC panel won't dare to go against the ICC!

KD Dasi: 

Why is this case important?

The GBC has taken extra-judicial action, defending and covering up child abuse for over 30 years, rather than acting as mandated reporters of child abuse, circumventing the law and their own Child Protection policies and practicing de facto "qualified immunity" for Sannyasis to abuse children in ISKCON.

According to ISKCON resolutions and policy, this case should be reviewed by the Child Protection Office, not an illegitimate ad hoc panel that will set further precedent for their permission for Sannyasis to abuse children.

This case UNDERMINES ALL CHILD PROTECTION ENDEAVORS OF THE LAST 3 DECADES! Allowing sannyasis to abuse children with impunity deteriorates the sannyas ashram and Srila Prabhupada's legacy.

Please sign! ~ anonymously, if you wish.

This is important for the PROTECTION OF ALL CHILDREN.