Today the Bar Association continues the discussion we began in our last column on presidential pardons, prompted by the granting of pardon by Presidential David Granger to some score of persons. We note and welcome the fact that even though it might have been purely coincidental, President Granger, very soon after the Bar Association’s column appeared, addressed the matter in a speech to students marking Education Month. In explaining his action, Mr. Granger placed emphasis mainly on the apparent age of the persons who were pardoned, stating that youths ought to be in school and not in jail and promising to exercise his prerogative again next year.
There was no suggestion by the Bar Association or by the President that the pardoned persons, presumably young people, were not properly tried and convicted of offences under the law passed by the National Assembly. The question then is whether laws such as the Juvenile Offenders Act Chapter 10:03 and the Probation of Offenders Act Cap. 11:04, which are designed to offer rehabilitation of young offenders, are inadequate.
The Juvenile Offenders Act provides for the separation of arrested young offenders from adults, for the release,
