The suicide of Marlon Aguillera within the precincts of the Family Court, ten days ago, raises questions about the quality of justice that the nation’s children and youth receive.

Hazel Thompson-Ahye, child rights advocate and coordinator of a 2000 UN-supported Regional Juvenile Symposium in Port of Spain, contends in a letter to the Editor in this week’s Catholic News that if the recommendations of the meeting had been adopted then 16-year-old Marlon would not have been before the courts at all. He may have been alive today.

From the comments of the child rights advocate, it appears that while a willingness to adopt the recommendations of the 2000 symposium exists here and in other parts of the region, those with the power have been slow to take the necessary steps to ensure that the proposals are implemented.

Thompson-Ahye notes that one of the recommendations was that “all juveniles be provided with legal representation at the earliest stage of proceedings”. She then raises a series of disturbing questions.

To, perhaps, beg the question further: Did anyone know the real reasons for Marlon’s wandering away from home and for not listening to his mother? If there was someone who knew, was that person called to present the young man’s case to the magistrate? And, why not YTC?

While no one should expect the training centre to be a holiday camp and Marlon may have been a rebellious and angry 16-year-old, his refusal to return there which he stated most emphatically with his life seems to suggest that all may not be well at that institution.

Thompson-Ahye who, as part of her research, had visited the YTC and other such centres, including Catholic juvenile justice institutions, states in her letter that personnel in all these places “were totally unaware of the UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice and the UN Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty”, although they were supposed to be guided by them. Marlon knew YTC well; he had been there on several occasions. He chose death rather than go back to the place.

Marlon’s Voice

Marlon’s problems, however, did not begin at the YTC. He chose, strangely, the streets rather than home. What was it that made the streets more attractive and so attractive?

Somewhere between the photograph of the child smiling with us in one of the dailies, published the day after the tragedy, and his wandering out onto the streets—or even much earlier—something went terribly wrong. Sadly, we have not heard Marlon’s voice.

For Marlon’s mother, Michelle Andrews, this tragedy is touched by a particular irony. Ms Andrews believed she was helping her son when she requested that he be sent to the YTC; that the institution would provide the kind of protection she believed Marlon needed.

While she grieves the loss of her child, several children continue to roam the streets freely because their mothers have given up on them. Ms Andrews must have our sympathy.  

This tragedy is yet another reminder to all in our society that we continue to fall short in matters pertaining to our children and youth. It calls us, again, to consider how we are doing in living God’s ways.

Jesus, faced with the evil which would ultimately bring him to the cross, and fully aware of the shortsightedness and self-seeking of those around him, “took a little child, set himin front of them, put his arms round him, and said to them, ‘anyone who welcomes one of these little children in my name, welcomes me’’”(Mark 9:36,37).

Once more a child stands before us.