High Court awards $3m to siblings jailed as minors in adult prisons

A High Court judge has awarded over $3 million in compensation to the family of two Diego Martin siblings, Brian and Sasha Seepersad, whose constitutional rights were violated when they were unlawfully detained in adult prison facilities while still minors.

Justice Margaret Mohammed ordered the state to pay $1.85 million in compensatory and vindicatory damages to Brian Seepersad's estate and $1.23 million to Sasha Seepersad, citing inhumane conditions and institutional negligence during their prolonged detention.

“This court must register its disgust at the defendants’ conduct toward Brian and Sasha,” Justice Mohammed said in a strongly worded ruling on May 2. “The defendant must be punished for such appalling conduct. It is shocking that this appalling conduct was committed by the state which has a legal obligation to protect all minors.”

The judgment followed a 2021 ruling by the Privy Council, which upheld an appeal against the local Court of Appeal’s refusal to grant constitutional relief.

The Privy Council found that the state violated the siblings' right to protection of the law under Section 4(b) of the Constitution when they were remanded to the Youth Training Centre (YTC) and the Arouca Women's Prison, respectively, after being jointly charged with murder alongside two adults in January 2014.

Brian, who was 13 at the time of his arrest, endured 818 days of unlawful detention in conditions the court described as "appalling and oppressive." These included severe overcrowding, exposure to sexual abuse, lack of ventilation, poor sanitation, inadequate nutrition, and deprivation of educational and therapeutic support. He died in March 2020 during a police operation in Morvant after escaping from YTC months earlier.

His mother and legal representative, Karen Mohammed, was awarded $850,000 in compensatory damages and $1 million in vindicatory damages on his behalf.

Sasha, who was 15 when arrested, was held for 730 days in the Women's Prison and later at St Jude’s Home for Girls. She was subjected to routine strip searches, feared sexual abuse, received minimal educational access, and was denied the ability to practice her Muslim faith. Justice Mohammed noted that Sasha “was robbed of her innocence” during her detention and awarded her $730,000 in compensatory damages and $500,000 in vindicatory damages.

The judge ruled the state had an obligation to provide proper facilities for minors presumed innocent until proven guilty, but instead exposed both children to degrading, unsafe, and psychologically damaging environments.

She said Brian endured sexual abuse, constant bullying, and confinement in unsanitary, overcrowded cells, and his innocence was “perverted and the trauma he suffered was immense.”

For Sasha, Justice Mohammed described her treatment as humiliating and dehumanising. She lived in fear of sexual violence, received no proper education, and was denied access to Muslim religious practices.

“Sasha’s innocence was also violated,” Mohammed said, adding that the siblings were not only unlawfully detained but were treated as if they had already been convicted.

The judge further condemned the state for misleading judicial authorities for nearly a decade regarding the true conditions of Brian’s detention and for failing to implement key recommendations from the Children’s Authority to support his mental and emotional recovery.

“The defendants did not make appropriate arrangements for Brian and Sasha upon detaining them.”

She also said the authorities “intentionally and deliberately chose” to disregard reports on the suitability of the institutions and did nothing to address the conditions the siblings were kept in.

“By doing so, the defendants were aware that their actions were unlawful. In my opinion during the period of Brian and Sasha’s unlawful detention was institutional inertia by the defendants as nothing was actively done to ensure that Brian and Sasha were housed in facilities which met the standards of a community residence.

“It was particularly disturbing as the period of unlawful detention for both Brian and Sasha were long.

“The court must register its disgust at the defendant’s conduct towards Brian and Sasha. The defendants must be punished for such appalling conduct, and the court must send a strong message in order to deter the defendants, their servants

and or agents from repeating the conduct as was demonstrated in this action.”

In 2017, before being elevated to the Court of Appeal, former High Court judge Vasheist Kokaram had upheld the siblings lawsuit, in which they claimed that the Children’s Act and other legislation related to children’s rights required that minors facing trial for criminal offences be housed in community residences designed to cater specifically to their needs.

Kokaram also ruled that their due process and protection of the law rights under Section 4 (a) and (b) of the Constitution were infringed and ordered a total of $450,000 in compensation.

The siblings were removed from the adult facilities and placed in children’s homes, which were also not licensed under the legislation, but were returned to the facilities when they each turned 18.

When the Court of Appeal considered the siblings’ case in late 2018, it affirmed Kokaram’s ruling that their detention contravened the Children’s Act.

However, his rulings on the constitutional breaches and compensation were reversed.

In its ruling in 2021, the Privy Council agreed with the Appeal Court that the siblings’ due process rights were not infringed by their improper detention at an adult prison.

However, the apex court did rule that the facts of what transpired demonstrated a serious failure of the state to afford them protection of the law under Section 4 (b) of the Constitution.

“Fundamentally, the executive brought into operation the Children’s Act without having first put in place the arrangements necessary to give effect to their mandatory requirements in a context where the intended beneficiary of these measures, namely children, had been identified by both international and domestic law as deserving of special protection,” the judgment said.

The ruling noted that the executive’s failure to establish community residences, as required, was directly responsible for the siblings' unlawful detention.

Attorneys Anand Ramlogan, SC, Renuka Rambhajan, Jayanati Lutchmedial, Ganesh Saroop and Natasha Bisram represented the siblings and their mother. Amrita Ramsook represented the state.