From the Guardian article linked in a previous post:

"The instructions outline a policy of 'strictest' secrecy in dealing with allegations of sexual abuse and threatens those who speak out with excommunication.

They also call for the victim to take an oath of secrecy at the time of making a complaint to Church officials."

I only just glanced at the actual document. It is pretty heavy slogging, but I might try to read it later.

In fairness to the Church, however, I find it hard to believe that any victim of clerical abuse was required to "take an oath of secrecy AT THE TIME OF MAKING A COMPLAINT.". Somehow that just doesn't ring true.

In such cases, the bishop might suggest that the victim or his/her parents allow the Church to handle the matter internally. If this was agreed to, only then would the oath of secrecy apply, and that would be in the interest of a fair and unbiased investigation and hearing, and would apply equally to everyone concerned.

No Church official including the pope himself would have the authority to require such an oath if the victim chose to decline that option and go to the police; in fact, attempting to impose such an oath might well be a crime in itself.

Now, if the victim agreed to have the Church settle the matter internally, and the result was a 'whitewash', then it's doubtful that the victim would feel obligasted by such an oath and highly unlikely that any excommunication would ensue. Indeed, in many such cases one of the parents might not even be Catholic, in which case threats of excommunication would be meaningless.

I may be splitting hairs here, I just don't believe that the situation would have been as stated in the article.