Registration numbers

The bill required a three-fifths majority. Nineteen senators spoke on it. I’m not aware who has polling numbers, but if talk radio is any guide, there’s a lot of public support for harsh justice against sex offenders. Last May, a group of Oropune Gardens residents administered extrajudicial punishment on a 49-year-old market vendor who spoke to a six-year-old he did not know, beating him brain dead.

Senators in turn called the names of a number of victims, mostly of childhood sexual violence, into the Parliament chamber. Few were “survivors,” a term many people with a sexual assault in their past prefer; most are dead. Some were quite famous. Others who were nameless. They were represented by graphic descriptions of violence done to them, or lasting mental illness it caused.

“Analysis paralysis,” the Attorney General chimed. Let’s move ahead with the sexual offender register that’s the purpose of this one bill; it won’t solve all issues to do with sex crimes.

A register has existed in law for 19 years; but not in reality. New legislation isn’t needed to create one. But this has new features.

Eight months, the Attorney General counted, since he sent the proposed legislation to 2,000 lawyers and numerous government stakeholders. Not to us, though, civil society groups argued, on seeing the bill less than a week before debate began; let’s make it better in a JSC.

Perhaps legislation should routinely go to groups like the Association of Civil Society Organisations, or to ministries’ sector stakeholder lists. Government need not even send it; the Parliament can.

Eight years now, the AG complained, one piece of legislation has been in a joint select committee. Admirably, though, Government voted to send the register bill to a special select committee where senators, with help from survivors and NGOs, will have six weeks to polish it.

“Our Government has taken pride in being an exception to the rule,” the AG boasted as he made his contribution. “I can say with certainty that we provide statistics as to what Trinidad and Tobago looks like.” Statistics about sexual offences are really important. They are one thing that an effective offender register can generate.

Numbers can guide good policy—and this debate. Some studies cited by senators supported, while others discounted the impact of a register on re-offending and public safety. Like the retribution and vigilance on the radio — and the victims memorialised in the chamber — not a lot of the figures put forth seemed relevant or meaningful.

Two did.

Senator Khadijah Ameen cited statistics the AG did distinguish himself in providing to Parliament, last June. Just two per cent, 321, of 13,360 sexual offence charges during the 19-year retroactive period through which sex offenders would be registered under the new legislation have resulted in convictions (the AG also noted last week that two dozen cases have been pending since “antiquity”—over nine years).

Imagine that more people commit offences than are charged. But imagine, too, that as few as half of those charged actually committed the offence. Then 95 of every 100 sex offenders would not be in the register we are creating. Because they aren’t convicted.

Civil society groups shared a different set of numbers with the senators. A landmark IDB study of violence against women showed only 16 per cent of those experiencing sexual abuse by non-partners (a subset of all sexual violence victims) report offences at all; half of those reports result in cases; and 17 per cent of cases in convictions. In other words, if all those women are telling the truth, then for every 100 of their offenders we’d be able to capture fewer than two in our register.

Senator Clarence Rambharat in particular pointed out how many sex offenders are well known to their young victims, who don’t need a register to find them because they live under the same roof. Or are in the pulpit on Sunday. He came close, but I don’t recall any other senator taking account of the fact that for victim after victim they invoked, no one is convicted or no one was charged, even when someone was reported.

Their offenders are real. They would not be prevented from re-offending by our register.

In winding up, the AG also reminded us when you’re charged with a sexual offence currently “That is public information…you are on parade with open reportage. When you are convicted, it is a public affair.” And TT is small.

A register may be good policy. But to be safe in crossing the street, you have to look both ways. If we want to put offenders in a register, we have to look back to why we will have so few to register. And fix that too.