JUDGE’S CALL

CHILDREN’S ADVOCATE Diahann Gordon Harrison has cautioned against any legislative move to impose a mandatory minimum sentence of 20 years for children convicted of capital murder.

According to Gordon Harrison, a mandatory minimum that is absolute is dangerous as there are borderline cases.

The children’s advocate argued that when it comes to mandatory minimum sentences for children, she is always concerned about the stripping of the discretion from the judge based on the circumstances to make an informed decision as to what is appropriate.

“If you take away the discretion from the judge, especially as it relates to children, we are saying that the aim of juvenile justice is rehabilitation with a view to reintegrating them,” she told The Gleaner yesterday.

On Tuesday, Justice Minister Delroy Chuck said he was in support of a proposal for a mandatory minimum sentence of 20 years for children between the ages of 15 and 17 who are convicted of capital murder.

MUST BE BOLD

Chuck put his position on the table during a meeting of the Joint Select Committee reviewing the Criminal Justice (Administration) (Amendment) Act, 2023, the Offences Against the Person (Amendment) Act, 2023, and the Child Care and Protection (Amendment) Act.

“We have to be bold and make it firm that anyone, especially youngsters, who understand what they are doing and from you reach 15 and up, you clearly must understand what you are doing and the consequence of what may happen if you are apprehended and convicted in a court of law,” Chuck said.

“I would urge us to agree that this section applies only to capital murder and we agree with not less than 20 years because this bill ... should send that signal, especially to parents who have children under their charge to control their young people because if they don’t, they may well be visiting these children for the next 20 years in jail,” he said.

He argued that the family and friends of murder victims might feel that the justice system had failed them if a sentence was not imposed that satisfied the public interest.

In a Gleaner interview, Gordon Harrison explained that in her submission to the parliamentary committee, she suggested that in a high-crime environment, the mandatory minimum should be kept but with a proviso.

According to the children’s advocate, the judge should not be barred from requesting and obtaining a social enquiry report and that he or she should be given the discretion to prescribe the sentence that he or she deems appropriate.

Executive Director of Stand Up for Jamaica Carla Gullotta has rejected the proposal for a mandatory minimum sentence, saying that a child cannot be compared with an adult in terms of being fully aware and responsible for what he or she does.

Gullotta said that there are many youngsters who are at risk due to lack of parenting and circumstances that expose them to antisocial behaviour.

“Once you incarcerate for 20 years somebody who is 15, you are completely sure that person won’t be able to be integrated once he is out because he has been completely damaged because he has been institutionalised,” she said.

Gullotta told The Gleaner that she was surprised that the justice minister, who has been pushing the restorative justice programme across the country, was batting for a 20-year mandatory minimum sentence for children.

“I applaud it. I love it and we practise it. We use it in the ghettos, and it works,” she said of the restorative justice programme.

During Tuesday’s deliberations by the committee, Senator Donna Scott Mottley urged her fellow lawmakers to revisit the submissions made by various civil society groups and the minutes of the previous deliberations to “give a very sober consideration” to the decision that would be made by the committee.

editorial@gleanerjm.com