Child advocate opposes ‘close age’ clause in Sexual Offences Act

Screenshot 2025 01 18 At 10.11.59 pm
Anti-rape sign (photo: courtesy of Pixabay)

Spokesperson for the non-profit organisation Hear the Children’s Cry, child advocate and attorney-at-law, Priscilla Duhaney, has strongly opposed the proposed amendment to the Sexual Offences Act, specifically its ‘close age’ clause that is currently being tabled in Parliament. Submitted to the Joint Select Committee of Parliament, the Sexual Offenses Act had several recommendations made to amend the current legislation. These suggestions included the establishment of a ‘close in age group’ exception. This legal pardon was explained to mean that minors who willingly engaged in sexual activity would be able to avoid criminal charges. Justice Minister Delroy Chuck has clarified that the close in age group exception would also cater for relations between minors and adults where the age gap is no more than four years, citing an example between a 15-year-old and a 19-year-old.

Duhaney has since rejected this proposal, describing it as a measure that could open the door to predatory behaviour and increased exploitation of minors. “We are dismissing that proposal. We do not agree with it and we stand resolute in that position because we foresee – we perceive that this might open a floodgate for our children to be violated in every sense”. She says that the act of minors partaking in sexual activity should remain criminalised as exploration cannot be used as a defence. “We don’t believe that there should be any close in age clause. So, if it is that you have two minors under the age of 16 that are experimenting, exploring, whatever word the other advocates and others are using, we are saying the solution to this is to hold the children accountable, because if they are aware of what their actions are, and the repercussions of their actions, they must be somewhat accountable, she argued.

Duhaney believes that maintaining these laws are ultimately to protect all children. “In our society today, as we would have seen, teenage pregnancy is on the rise. Sexually transmitted diseases are on the rise and it is particularly among young people. We are also looking at the psychological, the emotional, and the physical trauma that comes along with these. And we want to make sure that our children are protected at all costs”.

Duhaney maintains that using the law along with social interventions is the best way to combat sexual relations among minors, instead of pardoning their behaviour. “Put it this way, do mass education campaigns, because that is lacking. We are not seeing the results of the law, because a lot of persons don’t even know,” she continued “We are saying take the approach of tiers, balance the law and social intervention strategies.”

She recommends a two tiered approach, “Tier one, the law is used for deterrence, right? It’s a deterrent approach. Hold them into custody. Let there be station bail afforded to them. Once they are brought before the court, the court is then to now mandate them to go to church as a religious intervention or divine intervention, because as we can see, some of the issues are root causes”. She continued, “Maybe they are not properly integrated, properly advised, properly educated. We want them to be assigned to a religious group, a foundation that is going to guide them morally, we also are looking at community service”.

After a successful rehabilitation effort has taken its course, she also recommends that their records be cleared so as not to harm their futures. “After some form of intervention that speaks to their soul, their mind, and their body then we of course should afford them an expungement in short order. We are not trying to cripple or paralyze our children’s future. And so we want that to be clear”, she said.

Tier two would address the close age clause that would allow consent being given from a minor to an adult, “Now we have seen where the Minister of Justice has also spoken about the four-year age difference, and he would have accepted or believed that, that’s a good age gap to use. And you’re looking now at a minor, 15 versus a 19-year-old. That takes it out of the realm of really close age”, she said.

Duhaney further highlighted that a 19-year-old is undeniably an adult and should not be sexually related to a minor. She calls for a criminal sentencing in this regard, for the adult, who she says “should know better”. “ Hold them (young adults) at a higher level. They may have to serve some time. What we suggest, though, is that they are going to spend some time incarcerated, but a short period, and also afford them bail opportunity in short order. In addition to that, expungement should also be an option”, she stated explaining the importance of accountability, punishment and rehabilitation.

Furthermore, Duhaney fears that the clause has room to either be misunderstood or misused, which would leave minors in a vulnerable position. “If you are going to accept a four-year age gap which includes a 15 to 19 or 18 to 14-year-old then it is possible that you’ll be finding that minors are being groomed by adults and so you are seeing a major issue in the foreseeable future and you may find that there are more sexual violations. If you excuse or accept this you will find that our adults will be preying on minors under the protection of the law”, Duhaney observed.

She continued by highlighting the major disparities between the lives of a minor and an adult, which she believes makes these sexual relationships extremely inappropriate. “When we look at it in our education system a 19-year-old could very much be in university while a 15-year-old could very much be in third form. The age gap being four years might seem short to some, but the level of maturity, the level of exposure, the emotional development, mental and physical, financial development and the possibilities vary completely. And so that is one of the reasons why we definitely do not support that four-year age gap or four-year close-in-age exception.”

Hear the Children’s Cry remains resolute in its opposition to the proposed amendment, standing firm in its mission to advocate for stronger protections for minors and a balanced approach that incorporates both legal and social interventions. “It leaves minors vulnerable to be preyed upon. It leaves minors to be groomed, it leaves minors to be mentally, physically, and emotionally traumatized or violated by those that are older when they really should be protecting them. We cannot excuse or pardon this”, she stated.

Similar Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *