THE EDITOR: The reports of Marlon Aguillera’s suicide at the Trinidad Family Court, has moved me to write this letter.
Marlon’s case fell within the realm of juvenile justice. The order made for his remand to the Youth Training Centre (YTC) was made under the archaic juvenile justice law in the Children Act of Trinidad and Tobago, enacted in 1925 and amended from time to time.
In 2000, a Regional Juvenile Justice Symposium, organised by UNICEF Caribbean Area Office in collaboration with the UNDCP and Penal Reform International, was held at the Crowne Plaza Hotel in Trinidad.
At the end of that symposium, of which I was the coordinator, a number of recommendations, termed the Caribbean 2000 Consensus on Juvenile Justice, were made. I wish to highlight some of these recommendations, which, had they been implemented, Marlon would have been alive today.
They are:
1. “That legislation be enacted in all jurisdictions to abolish status offences, which are acts that are deemed offences when committed by juveniles, but are not considered such when perpetrated by adults.”
Marlon was before the court for a status offence, that of being an uncontrollable child. Had this recommendation been implemented, Marlon would not have been placed before the court, but under the supervision of a probation officer or other social worker or agency.
2. “That all juveniles be provided with legal representation at the earliest stage of proceedings.”
Who was there to speak for Marlon to explain to the magistrate his reason(s) for wandering away from home, his reason(s), for not wanting to return to YTC, the experiences he might have had during his previous sojourn at that institution, his reason(s) for not listening to his mother?
Who was there to negotiate or mediate a behavioural plan or contract which could have resulted in his agreeing to certain boundaries or limitations on his conduct? Who could explain on his behalf how the possible absence of a meaningful father/son relationship was impacting his life?
3. “That deprivation of liberty be used as a measure of last resort and for the shortest possible time within the juvenile justice system.”
Marlon’s mother came to the court asking for one relief, that of his detention at YTC, and the court obliged. Were other options considered and/or recommended? Another recommendation of the symposium was that “a variety of measures be utilized in all jurisdictions to divert juveniles from the criminal justice system.”
Were the mother and magistrate aware that YTC does not extend its rehabilitation programmes to youths on remand, but only to those who are committed to the institution?
Is there any separation of youths who are on remand for committing serious crimes from those who are institutionalised for being beyond control? Another of the recommendations made at the symposium was that “the issue of training of personnel throughout the Criminal Justice System be accorded priority action.”
In the course of my research into the juvenile justice system in Trinidad and Tobago, I visited every one of the mainstream juvenile justice institutions – St Michael’s Home for Boys, YTC, St Jude’s Home for Girls, the St Dominic’s Children’s Home and the St Mary’s Children’s Home.
The personnel of these institutions had not been trained in and were totally unaware of the UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice and the United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty, although they were expected to act in accordance with these Rules.
I observed many breaches of these United Nations Norms and Guidelines in juvenile justice in the policies of these institutions and detailed them in my report.
The government is expected to report on training programmes for juvenile justice personnel in every report to the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child.
During the symposium, every agency was given a package of all the documents which comprise the United Nations Standards and Norms in juvenile justice, which included those mentioned above and also the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the United Nations Rules for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency. One wonders what has happened since then.
Another recommendation was that “the issue of juvenile justice reform be placed as an urgent item on the agenda of the meetings of CARICOM Legal Affairs Committee, the Council for Human and Social Development and other relevant organs of CARICOM.”
In July of this year, six years after the symposium, I was invited to a meeting in Port of Spain organised by CARICOM to present the recommendations of this symposium and regional developments in juvenile justice since the symposium.
These are signs that as a region we are now determined to get serious about the matter of juvenile justice, perhaps, even to implement the recommendation that “all States ensure the provision of sufficient human, social, financial, administrative and physical resources for the effective functioning of the juvenile justice system.”
I wonder, though, how many Marlons must die and how many Amys and Sean Lukes must be killed before the rhetoric is translated into action.
In all of these tragic cases, the emphasis should not be on the need for absolution from blame, for all the actors in the scenario must share some blame, but on the need for urgent solutions to reform the system of juvenile justice.
Regional governments, please, do not continue to fiddle, while our children’s hearts, souls and bodies burn.
Hazel Thompson Ahye, Attorney- at-law/child rights advocate,
The Bahamas |