Penal Code Bill-Assembly declares zero tolerance against sex offenders |15 September 2005

The Bill, which proposed mandatory sentence of seven years, for a first offence, for convicted sex offenders of children, received unanimous approval from members of the majority SPPF party, who called for "zero tolerance" against those who abuse innocent children and agreed that the provisions in the Bill will show "no mercy" in sentences to be imposed.

Members of the Opposition, however, despite agreeing that sexual abuse against children was a crime that should be punished severely, chose to abstain on what they described as “legal grounds”.

They argued that the mandatory sentencing was unconstitutional, that it will "tie the hands" of the judiciary, unabling the judge to use his own discretion to pass "the correct sentence based on the circumstances" as "no two cases are ever similar." 

When presenting the Bill, the Minister for Health & Social Services, Vincent Meriton, said it was part of a national strategy to protect children from sexual crimes. He said various non-governmental organisations from the civil society and the government are in favour of the implementation of stricter measures.

The provision regarding sexual assault against a child under the age of 15 seeks to impose a seven-year mandatory sentence on individuals over the age of 18 who are convicted for a first offence and a mandatory 14-year sentence for a second offence within a 10-year period.

The same sentences will apply to individuals convicted for sexual interference with a child under 15 and with a dependent child over 15 years, but below the age of 18.

The bill would also make it an offence – though not subject to any mandatory sentences – to make, take or possess an indecent picture of a child, or to wilfully or negligently exhibit any indecent material to a child.

Pointing out that child pornography was widespread on the Internet, Minister Meriton said this provision was a pre-emptive measure to discourage those with paedophilic tendencies from engaging in these activities.

The maximum sentence that can be imposed for sexual offences against minors is 20 years.

Arguing against the mandatory sentencing, members of the Opposition who intervened, namely Honourable Annette Georges, Bernard Georges, Wavel Ramkalawan, David Pierre and Collin Dyer, highlighted the injustices they said it will lead to, such as disregarding the rights of the accused and preventing the judge from treating two different cases, differently.

They also expressed concern that the sentence being imposed by the legislative would undermine the independence of the judiciary.

But members of the SPPF, namely Yvy Edmond, Rukaiya Jumaye, Patrick Herminie and Marie-Louise Potter spoke fervently in favour of the amendments, saying that the mandatory sentencing would act as a strong deterrent against sexual abuse.

Hon. Herminie said the Bill was also sending a powerful message to parents also to start educating their child about sexual offences to discourage sex at an early age. He said this when arguing against the fact that 'consented' sex between an 18-year-old boy and a 14-year-old girl should not be subjected to the mandatory sentencing, a point suggested by Hon A. Georges and Ramkalawan. He stressed that with regard to sexual abuse, the sentence passed by judges should reflect the prevailing concern and fear of the civil society.

But as pointed out by Hon. Potter when referring to sentences handed down in past cases, judges had failed to give severe punishment, citing the case where "a teacher was given a 6-month sentence suspended for two years after being found guilty of abusing four school children."  Given the alarming prevailing rate of 110 cases of sexual abuse against children recorded over the past months this year, Hon. Potter said the time to act was now.

As argued by Hon Jumaye, judges have been given too many discretion but had not delivered accordingly. She said in the case of sexual abuse, it was high time to start giving more attention to the plea of victims than to the rights of the accused.

The Bill will go into ‘Committee Stage’ next Tuesday where a number of technical points will be discussed.