UWI gives platform to close-in-age defence debate

From the benches of Parliament to the debating society at The University of the West Indies (UWI), arguments for and against legalising consensual sex among minors continue to stir opposing views, particularly an accompanying Jamaicans For Justice (JFJ) recommendation of a ‘close-in-age’ defence, which could absolve adults, up to age 19, of having sexual relations with 14-year-olds.

Exactly three days before addressing the Joint Select Committee of Parliament reviewing the 2018 Child Diversion Act on March 3, attorney-at-law Priscilla Duhaney, spokesperson for Hear The Children Cry (HTCC), was among Team Opposition - on the invite of UWI’s Debating Society - arguing the topic which had re-emerged in the public domain through a JFJ report, ‘Civil Society Review of the Diversion of Alternative Measures for Children in Conflict with the Law in Jamaica’.

Joining Duhaney in opposition were criminologist and police officer, Dr Jason McKay, and Dekardiego Nelson, president of the University of Technology’s Debating and Public Speaking Society, for the debate titled, ‘Children, Consent and the Law’.

Team Proposition comprised Glenroy Murray, executive director, Equality For All Foundation, Dr Nadene Spence, and student-debater Kimani Leslie, president of Excelsior High School’s debating society.

Consensual sexual activity

An involved audience listened as Murray led off for Team Proposition, arguing that criminalising consensual sexual activity between minors undermines the objectives of the Child Diversion Programme, which was launched in 2020 to redirect children in conflict with the law away from the courts, instead pointing them towards rehabilitative interventions.

“Section 10 of the Sexual Offences Act of 2009 makes it an offence for anyone to have sexual intercourse with a person under 16 years of age. Sexual intercourse is defined as penetration of the vagina by the penis.

“Consequently, other sexual acts such as cunnilingus, fellatio or digital penetration are covered by Grievous Sexual Assault under section 4 of the Act. Section 4(3)(b) makes it an offence if those acts, among others, are carried out on a person under 16.

“It is these sections that have the effect of criminalising not only cases where adults take advantage of minors, but also where two persons under 16 engage in sexual activity with each other,” posited the 2018-2019 Chevening Scholar and 2022 nominee for the Prime Minister’s Youth Award for Excellence.

“It is this latter scenario that we are confronted with,” Murray argued, pointing to a 2025 report by JFJ, which states that, for the three-year period of 2022–2024, of 710 children arrested for crimes, 107 faced charges for grievous sexual assault, 121 for sexual intercourse with a person under 16 and 43 for indecent assault.

“These offences made up almost 40 per cent of the cases of arrest,” Murray summarised, taking a shot at Team Opposition’s McKay, adding that his opponents wanted to maintain criminalisation of consensual sex between minors to “make the work of the police easier” instead of undertaking proper investigative procedures.

McKay, responding for Team Opposition, reminded of the realities facing females as young as 13 years old, especially in Jamaica’s many garrison communities controlled by gang members, many of whom constitute “the perfect, agile gunman” at 17, an age which falls within JFJ’s proposed close-in-age exemption.

Garrisons

“Jamaica is said to have 13 garrison communities controlled by gangs. However, within those 13 garrisons, there are scores of enclaves each run by two or three opposing gangs. These are areas in which the only value gangs attach to females are their bodies,” said McKay, who has served as a police officer for 22 years and is attached to the St Catherine South Special Operations Unit.

“The boys are recruited to the gangs from as early as age 12. The females start attracting the attention of the gunmen, who are as young as 17, at age 12 or 13. Which family member will be bold or brave enough to step forward to intervene without backing of the law criminalising the offence?” McKay asked, warning Team Proposition that they were “heading down a slippery slope”, which, if followed, “Jamaica would quickly pay dearly”.

Spence, arguing “unapologetically through the lens of women’s rights and gender justice”, reiterated Team Proposition’s position, citing other jurisdictions to include comparative Commonwealth experience.

“In Canada, the age of consent is 16, but the Criminal Code provides a close-in-age exemption. Youth aged 12 and 13 may engage in consensual sexual activity with someone less than two years older. Youth aged 14 and 15 may do so with someone less than five years older. Crucially, the exemption does not apply where there is exploitation, trust, authority, or dependency,” Spence pointed out before outlining Team Proposition’s close-in-age stance.

“Where two adolescents are no more than two years apart and engage in consensual activity, no offence is committed. Where the age gap is greater, the younger person must be no less than 12 and the other no more than four years older, with a defence available only where there is no authority, dependency, or coercion,” she said.

“Mr Speaker, blanket criminalisation clogs our justice system and risks entrenching disadvantage but reform without safeguards would betray our daughters. The path forward must do both, reduce unnecessary criminalisation and strengthen protection against abuse,” she added.

inner-city communities

Duhaney, addressing the recent sitting of the Joint Select Committee of Parliament, argued that faced with pressure for sex, young girls in some inner-city communities often deliberately go missing to escape predators. She also warned against health issues should the floodgates of decriminalisation be flung open.

“There is a greater health issue that government will have to deal with - STIs (sexually transmitted infections), teenage pregnancies and mental health - from which we must protect children. We have to protect them from self-inflicting harm,” Duhaney pointed out, adding that scientific studies confirm that minors are incapable of making rational decisions because of underdevelopment of the brain.

Nelson also sought to drive home Team Opposition’s point regarding the dangers of allowing minors the freedom of consensual sex.

“Adolescence is a period of high vulnerability, especially for girls, who believe they have the need to ‘belong’ in certain circumstances. The law stands as a bright line. What Proposition is proposing is that the burden of risk should be shifted from institution to minors,” Nelson argued.

At the end of the debate, Jermaine Barrett, founder and executive director, Jamaica Association for Debating and Empowerment, said he was impressed by UWI’s Debating Society thrashing out a matter in the public domain, and added that there might be need for a follow-up debate on the topic, especially in relation to the close-in-age exemption being proposed for Parliament’s consideration.

editorial@gleanerjm.com