Guilty pleas not intended ahead of joining child diversion programmes – Chuck

Some judges appear to be misinterpreting the Child Diversion Act by compelling minors to plead guilty to criminal charges before steering them to intervention programmes, Justice Minister Delroy Chuck has said.

The Child Diversion Programme, which is grounded in the Child Diversion Act 2018, seeks to steer children between ages 12 and 17 years old away from the formal criminal justice system in circumstances where they are charged with specific crimes, including assault occasioning actual bodily harm.

Minors charged with murder, shooting with intent, robbery and other serious crimes are not eligible for the programme, which offers rehabilitation and intervention support.

Chuck said the result of some judges’ interpretation of the legislation is that minors end up with a criminal record that could follow them for life.

Chief Justice Bryan Sykes is expected to address the issue today when he meets with journalists in what has been labelled ‘A Conversation with the Judiciary’.

Chuck made the assertion on Tuesday during a meeting of a joint select committee of Parliament that is reviewing the Child Diversion Act.

Vanessa Clarke, director of child diversion at the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, cited the recent case of a minor who was charged with a crime, but successfully completed a diversion programme.

Upon becoming an adult, the man was employed to a call centre for one month before he was terminated.

“He was told that there were adverse findings on his [criminal] record and as such, he was dismissed from his job,” Clarke told lawmakers.

No details were disclosed about the case, so as to protect the identity of the individual.

Chuck, who is also chairman of the committee, said “this is the sort of thing that can happen” if child diversion cases are not “appropriately” handled.

He said that, in some cases, judges “literally ask the child, ‘Did you do it?’ and ‘If you did it, then you plead guilty’”.

“That is not the way it should be, because the idea is not to plead guilty and then you say you go for child diversion,” the justice minister said.

“The question is, is this an appropriate case for child diversion, and if it is and the child goes through a process of child diversion and successfully completes it, then the matter is literally dismissed, so the child doesn’t have a record.”

Chuck said a section of the legislation that speaks to children “taking responsibility” is being cited by judges as the basis for insisting on a guilty plea.

“To our mind, that was never the intent of the act,” he insisted.

The review by the joint select committee comes three years after the revision stipulated in the legislation.

The assertions made by Chuck are among the issues the committee will examine.

The Social Justice Division of the justice ministry, in its submissions to the committee on Tuesday, indicated that a “comprehensive review” of the Child Diversion Act is essential to address “existing gaps” and enhance the functioning of the programme.

Julia Wigan Moncrieffe, director of public law, restorative and preventative justice at the ministry, said one of the foremost effects of the review will be the creation of a clearer legal framework that clearly articulates the parameters of the diversion programme.

This, she said, will be achieved by refining definitions and clarifying the responsibilities of all the parties involved, including judges, prosecutors and law-enforcement personnel.

The Child Diversion Programme has handled more than 2,810 referrals from the police and the courts over the five-year period between March 2020 and March last year, according to the submissions by the justice ministry.

livern.barrett@gleanerjm.com