The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that was expected to be signed between the Ministry of Public Security and the United Nations Children’s Fund on Tuesday to formalise the provision of diversionary measures for children in conflict with the law is another step towards giving young offenders a second chance as provided for under the Juvenile Justice Act of 2018. The Act, which, among other things, abolished the repugnant crime of ‘wandering’, was a very long time in coming. And while lawmakers fiddled around for years, hundreds of young lives were negatively impacted, perhaps forever.
Although the moves to put systems in place since the Juvenile Justice Bill was passed in April 2018 seem a bit sluggish, it was heartening to receive confirmation that magistrates, the police, probation departments, the Child Care and Protection Agency (CCPA) and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) have been operating in compliance with the new law, despite the lack of suitable diversion measures and an apparent dearth of understanding of the Act by the general public. According to information relayed to the media last week, the MOU will address the former. It will allow for informal procedures to tackle young people’s conflict with the law, including mediation. Furthermore, when guilt is ascertained, punishment can range from apologies to compensation and compulsory attendance at a specified vocational or education centre to community service, all in an effort to keep children out of penal institutions wherever possible.
There has been a lot of research done all over the world, most of which has concluded definitively that incarcerating children (under the age of 18) does not lead to a reduction in them committing offences. In fact, in societies where there are high numbers of children in penal institutions, there is also high juvenile recidivism, which has proven to be a gateway to adult criminal behaviour. The United States of America is a case in point. Intervention then, rather than incarceration, is the way to go and the MOU with UNICEF, which will include local NGOs, educational, vocational and church-based institutions and government agencies, will facilitate this.
It would appear that the MOU deals particularly with infractions and misdemeanours. These less serious crimes, even when committed by adults, tend not to draw heavy penalties. In general, the punishment for nonindictable offences can range from fines and community service to short jail terms from as low as three months to as high as three years. However, under the now-repealed abominable Juvenile Offenders Act, many children who were repeat truants, or who were caught ‘wandering’, often spent five or six years or more, depending on how old they were when they were sentenced, institutionalised at Onderneeming on the Essequibo Coast. That institution, the New Opportunity Corps, touted as a rehabilitative centre, had been found during inquiries conducted in 2012 and 2013 and an investigation by the CCPA in 2014 to be a hotbed of utter lawlessness. Abuse, both physical and sexual, being meted out to its juvenile inmates by staff and other inmates were among the accusations investigated.
While it is important in a criminal justice context not to treat children like adults, it would be ostrich-like to pretend that children do not commit felony offences, which include murder, rape and armed or violent robbery. There have been cases of children, who might have been groomed or simply seeking acceptance, in hard-core criminal gangs. Among them was the infamous Jermaine ‘Skinny’ Charles, said to have been one of at least three underage youth who were part of the notorious Rondell ‘Fine Man’ Rawlins gang.
Then in 2016, five youth were arrested and charged with the murder of Professor Perry Mars, who had been found beaten and tied up in his Prashad Nagar home, which had been robbed. Last year, three of them, who had already aged out of juvenile justice, pleaded guilty and were sentenced to two 12-year and a 10-year prison terms. While all three expressed remorse and indicated that they would turn their lives around after serving time, their ability to do so is significantly lessened given the fact that they are among the adult prison population. It is not impossible, but they will need strong wills and considerable support.
Decades after the need for it was ascertained, Guyana is still to address the absence of a proper rehabilitative institution for serious juvenile offenders. It would seem that, having expunged the misdemeanour offenders, mostly girls, the facility at Onderneeming has become the stopgap and this is so far from ideal as to match the rest of the failing penal system. The Juvenile Justice Act is a step forward, every effort must be taken to ensure that what supports it is strong enough that it does not result in two steps backward.
