CLICK HERE TO JOIN OUR WHATS APP GROUP
During the recent parliamentary debate on a new bill aimed at addressing loitering by children, MP for St. Philip South, Sherfield Bowen, voiced strong opposition to criminalizing children found loitering on the streets. In his remarks, Bowen argued that the criminal justice system is not the appropriate tool for handling this issue.
He noted that the bill, according to the explanatory memorandum, seeks to address the issue of children loitering on the streets. However, he questioned whether creating a criminal offense was the right approach.
“I cannot agree that the criminal court or the criminal system is the answer to children lying on the street,” Bowen stated. He supported an amendment proposed by the MP for City West, which targets bar owners, business establishments, and adults who harbor children. However, Bowen was clear in his opposition to involving children in the criminal justice system for loitering.
CLICK HERE TO JOIN OUR WHATS APP GROUP
“I do not see any commonality between the conduct of loitering and creating a criminal offense. I think the Education Act, an act of truancy, and other regulations can address this issue without resorting to criminal law,” Bowen asserted.
He went on to express concerns about Section 11(a) of the bill, which broadly defines any person under the age of 18 as subject to the new regulations. Bowen argued that this provision was overreaching, as it failed to consider that some minors under 18 are emancipated and legally permitted to be on the streets.
“This law prohibits any person under the age of 18, and I think it’s overbroad. It’s going to be unconstitutional to capture the rights of people who are allowed to be on the street,” Bowen added. He emphasized that the law needs to focus specifically on school children, rather than casting a wide net over all minors under 18.
. “We cannot be curbing the rights of young people to be on the street in a democracy,” he stated.
CLICK HERE TO JOIN OUR WHATS APP GROUP
WATCH:
Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]
“May be” unconstitutional….it is or it is not….what is it?
That’s our problem.
Sherfield Bowen is speaking rubbish. The age of majority (the point at which a person is legally an adult) is 18. It therefore follows that anyone under the age of 18 is a MINOR and a curfew can be imposed on them. The fine that is being proposed for the offence is levied against the PARENTS, as this would force them to control their children.
Bowen also speaks about alternatives to a curfew, but he NEVER mentions even one of those alternatives. For his opposition to the bill to be valid, he is compelled to suggest a workable alternative. The fact is that there is no real alternative to a curfew on minors.
The bill is quite in order and will serve its intended purpose. It is time for some people to start acting like parents to their children.
How old was Tessa?
This man, MP Bowen, is a genius and creative. I have expressed on numerous occasions that criminalizing children and youths for exercising their freedom and demanding for children and youths to be accustomed to their liberty and freedom to be taken away, being accustomed to confinement, is not the first option people with an advanced degree of knowledge in such field would do but as you know those who do not understand society and behavior will be quick to think the solution of every problem is to take away freewill and to punish or lay in wait to punish.
Putting more responsibility on parents, and society should have been the creative solution at this stage. Take steps first before you go to the worse of the worse. As an expert in this field, curfew is not appropriate at this time in Antigua and Barbuda and for youths.
Again, listen to my strong and well analyzed researched recommendation. Listen to this published statement from MP Bowen. He is what Antigua and Barbuda truly needs at this era as leader. And I am saying this because of what I am seeing and only for that reason.
I commend MP Bowen for his commonsense presentation. To simply criminalize anyone under 18 for being out under the curfews hours is not what the bill should be doing. All 18 year olds are not necessarily school children. There are working teens and other young adults that are out there and working. To restrict teens that are not school children is definitely unconstitutional, unlawful and illegitimate and this can be fought in the courts I think that this bill was hastily rushed through Parliament and several aspects of it need to be revisited and amended.
Agreed with you Dexter Pelle, you do your research and come with facts. ‘ may be ‘ is for someone who lack knowledge.His contribution is full of tar tar.
you lukcy a “tar tar” and not “gun shot” R.I.P Tessa Barthley
What is not being discussed is all of the politicians, business men, tourists and older men in general keeping underage girls (and boys in some cases) out at night for sex trafficking and “Diddy-styled” parties. Caribbean politicians can be so deceitful and hypocritical.
Come een like you attend and participate in these parties too
Don’t try to make sense of anything this government does Bowen, it’s just a waste of time..
I myself have questioned these bills from the onset…and the way they are written violates countless laws and human rights violations.
How can you justify a curfew/freedom of moving for a particular set of people without more data to quantity that stopping people from moving back and forth in mandatory or an emergency?
Where is the state of emergency for such a law?
And by the way, the freedom of movement for minors has been already addressed..the very reason for a lD for buying certain goods and attending certain places..so this bullshit is unconstitutional, because there is no national emergency to speak of, that warrants impeeding further movement for this particular set of people.
Pure BS laws this government passes.
dont try to make sense of anything WICKED UPP does. They put a GUNMAN KILLER on their ticket and all the P.O.W.A. cult lickers went silent at the command of the pants-wearing woman dictator Chairman….everybody leaving the IMF party under her!
Bowen needs to shut his mouth cause I kinda remember you love those little youngers bad 😒😒 need I call names
@Truth be told, is a few of them on the UPP love lil gurl. J.Truth you supporting and interviewing pedos and love talk bout Gaston 😆
Let’s take the good what Bowen is bringing to the table and stop trying him in the court all over again.
His points are valid. I am sure if any youth advocacy group challenge the constitutionality they will win. I don’t know if as a parliamentarian he can challenge this is court or represent an advisory group.
Mind you it is good that the government is thinking about protecting the youth. However, it seems like those that were in gangs are now being treated with more respect than those that are law abiding. We have scores of young people that successfully finished school at complete school at 16 / 17 and are working or going to university. Are they going to be harassed or do they have to wear collar saying honorary young. Like the black had to wear in South Africa – honorary blacks- tagged. A next point is that under the laws of Antigua it is consensual for a 17 year old to be in a sexual relationship. So if a 17 year old is found in company with her 19 boyfriend can they be charged and arrested.
We need to think things through properly and come up with proper and long term solutions. Look at education and sports . Develop proper programs. Too many boys are dropping through the cracks in our education system. We have class upon classes in our mix secondary school with all girls classes or the higher you go less boys. At what age are these boys dropping out of school.
I am no fan of Bowen. However what he is saying makes sense. If not common sense- legal sense. It’s both to me .
POW POW POW!!! mek he lick 2 shat inna fu you pickney and see how u tek it!!!