-case of five boys highlights weaknesses
Stamp It Out, which aims at strengthening protection against and reforming the laws on sexual offences has lost critical momentum, several stakeholders have observed, even as blatant abuses persist against women and children in the society.
And the violations continue owing to the archaic laws, indifferent parents and an unaccommodating legal system, stakeholders meeting at a recent forum organized by Red Thread and Help and Shelter said.
Articulating concerns and venting frustrations, stakeholders who included representatives from local women’s groups and members of the Guyana Police Force, spoke of the continued lack of collaboration between the relevant agencies and the red tape in the system that often prevents urgent intervention in particular cases.
Using the forum to chart a way forward, they recognized the urgent need for collective action against sexual abuse in the society, deliberated for some time on whether to form a new coalition to sustain efforts and or intensify support and get behind ‘Stamp it Out’ in a major way.
“Why are the law reforms taking so long, and why must our children continue to suffer as they do now?” one woman asked, referring to the proposed reform law in the ‘Stamp it Out’ consultation paper that is to be tabled in Parliament.
But even as they pointed to the outdated laws and spoke of the lack of empowerment of children in their homes, the conversation shifted to a sub-culture in the society that condones fathers and stepfathers molesting children, and family traditions that allow incest.
“In my years as a doctor I have seen how these sub-cultures in our society are affecting children, because in one particular instance, the little girl refused to lie with her father,” one participant said while emphasizing that it remains a key problem in the society, and a hurdle in ending sexual violence against children.
The issue of consent was raised, and participants frowned on the current abuse laws that failed to recognize boys, noting that the law pertaining to consent only applies to girls. They questioned why boys must remain vulnerable, arguing that the time has come for that particular law to be reformed immediately.
The legal system was criticized for being a continued burden for children involved in sexual offence cases, as participants pointed to what they described as the cruel manner in which attorneys are allowed to question children without any objections from magistrates and or judges.
Further, they pointed to the lengthy periods of time that cases often drag on for, observing that children rarely feel compelled to see the matters through given that a considerable amount of time would have elapsed before the matter reaches an end.
Karen DeSouza of Red Thread, in a case study, observed that the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) had sought to use the new law of instituting paper committal in a sexual offence case involving young boys, but the defence lawyer had objected.
Case Study
DeSouza conducted a case study on five young boys who were said to be sexually abused by a businessman back in 2007, which was presented at the forum. The study shed details on the case as it fell apart over a few months, but as DeSouza observed one of the young victims is still pursuing his matter in court.
Red Thread was informed of the case by some children who attend after-school classes at the centre and subsequently visited the school to ascertain the facts from the head teacher. The official at the school refused to speak with them, but Red Thread was able to speak with some of the parents of the children who had reported the abuse. The school’s Parent Teachers Association decided to call a meeting to address the affected parents’ concerns and Red Thread attended.
According to DeSouza, the meeting was unsatisfactory, particularly since it degenerated into the head teacher accusing parents of neglecting their children. No decisions were taken at the meeting, but several of the parents in attendance decided that they would not send their children to school until the police had arrested the accused abuser.
The parents staged a picket outside the ministries of Education and Human Services demanding action on behalf of the children concerned, and they spoke with Minister Priya Manickchand who advised them to follow up with the police.
Red Thread said that as far as it has gathered, the abuse of these children became known because one of them returned to school bleeding, and the guard, after enquiring of his state reported to the teacher which resulted in the parents being called in, and the reports being made to the police. The businessman was later charged with sexually abusing four boys.
DeSouza said that while the names of other boys were called who were also sexually abused by the businessman, none of the other parents were prepared to suffer through the court hearings, largely because of the stigma attached to the injury done to their sons.
Counselling
Red Thread later met the parents who were going to court and explained what they could expect from the court, including the likelihood of the Preliminary Inquiry dragging on.
DeSouza said that all the parents were in bad shape emotionally, so Red Thread arranged for a counsellor to meet them, then follow up in several sessions. She said the counselling helped a great deal. Counselling was also arranged for the boys, which mainly addressed their fear of the abuser.
Red Thread supported the parents through their request to the DPP to have the DPP take responsibility for the prosecution. It also arranged through the ministers of Education and Human Services for three of the boys to change schools.
“Our involvement here became necessary because the schools’ welfare person did not agree that the boys should change schools, and the responsible persons at the Ministry of Education were abusive to the parents going in to make the application directly,” DeSouza said.
Problems to
address
DeSouza said that while she has no interest in a blame game there were some problems that arose in the case that need to be addressed in general.
She said the media reports made it relatively easy to find the children involved by naming the school. She said also, that the Ministry of Education did not think it necessary to arrange counselling or guidance sessions with children in the affected school; did not meet affected parents to discuss the options for their children; and that the ministry with responsibility for child services did not find a role for itself in the process.
DeSouza said that the police still found it necessary to conduct traumatic confrontations, adding that the accused entered the police station with his firearm in his waist, and discreetly threatened the boys. Further, that the police did not investigate or act on all the information provided by the boys who gave statements.
According to DeSouza, the DPP did not focus enough on the files when charges were brought in order to identify and address gaps and necessary follow-up by the police. She said also that notwithstanding the reported approaches to the boy’s relatives, and the likelihood of ‘influencing’ of witnesses, the accused was given bail in the High Court without the DPP being notified.
Further, she said that the charges in relation to one boy were dismissed largely because the magistrate “did not attempt to protect him from a lawyer whose manner was alternately ingratiating and bullying. In effect, he asked a trick question from which the child was not protected.”
DeSouza said that the youngest of the boys was too confused about the sequence of events to give evidence so charges in his case were not brought. The boys were between the ages of 6 and 8 years old.
The PI continues, DeSouza said, adding that the case of a single boy is still before the court. She said that it could be four or five years before the High Court trial, adding that there is very little likelihood that a 13 or 14-year-old would want to relive the experience for the benefit of the court.
