Youth justice and the right to privacy

THE EDITOR: The principal goals of youth justice are rehabilitation and reintegration of the child into society. All the laws, principles, policies and practices which govern youth justice are geared towards the achievement of those goals. An important principle in youth justice is the child’s right to privacy.

This is because publicity creates stigmatisation which hampers rehabilitation and reintegration. All jurisdictions, including TT, have laws which forbid revealing the names of child offenders, and in some instances child victims and witnesses. Our laws against revealing the identity of child offenders predate our ratification of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which itself requires that we fully respect the privacy of children at all stages of the proceedings.

Our 1925 Children Act criminalised publication of the name, address, photograph, residence or anything likely to lead to identification of the child before the court. The fine imposed then was $400. For years this law was flouted with impunity by all media houses.

Over the years, I have written several letters to the press complaining of this breach of child rights. I recall phoning TV6 some years ago and protesting when they showed the face of a 13-year-old girl charged with murder and their telling me it was a mistake.

Within the last few years I have been pleased to observe a distinct improvement in the media’s reporting of cases of child offenders. I was also very happy to see the penalty for breaking that law increased to $50,000 in the new Children Act. Although the law refers to children before the court, our commitment is to honour the letter and spirit of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. This commitment, which we made in Belize City in 1996, at the Caribbean Conference on the Rights of the Child, requires that we extend protection of privacy to children alleged to, accused of or recognised as having committed a crime. Thus, the identity of child suspects should also be kept secret.

In the recent case of the child accused of murdering his little sister, his parents’ names appeared in the media. Thus, there was in the public domain direct information leading to the identity of the child. This was a clear breach of the law, which I hope was not assisted by the police, who have a duty to uphold the law and punish those who break the law.

The fact that the media know how to do better was evident in the reporting of the matter of the boy who, it was alleged, had chopped off the hand of his mother. The parents’ names never appeared in the mainstream media. Granted, the name of his school was reported, but there was less risk of his identification.

Recommendations were made publicly for his counselling. The other child received public condemnation. We would do well to remember that they are both our TT children, in need of our care and protection. However heinous the crime committed by a child, we must never let “the crime overshadow the child” (Nikhil Roy, 2015).

At the 2015 World Congress on Juvenile Justice in Geneva, the point was made, repeatedly, that people involved in youth justice must be merchants of hope. I hope that every child offender in this country will be given every opportunity for rehabilitation and reintegration. I hope that our new Children Court will be a beacon of hope signalling a new dawn in youth justice in our land.

HAZEL THOMPSON-AHYE
, child rights advocate