March against child legislation was necessary, says human rights activist

Human and gender rights activist Felicia Dujon has defended last Saturday’s march and rally against some aspects of the proposed Child Protection Bill while at the same time accusing some people of trying to dissuade Barbadians from participating.
Speaking at a Democratic Labour Party (DLP) spot meeting in Four Roads, St Philip on Sunday, she said the Watch Out My Children group, which organised the event, as well as concerned parents and other Barbadians had the legal right to oppose the proposed legislation by demonstrating.
Dujon charged that several influential people had tried to keep people from taking part in the march, as she made reference to comments made by Minister of Home Affairs Wilfred Abrahams.
“I observed what you said in the article that claimed that we do not need to march, that there’s no reason for us to march, and it’s a bit unfortunate that this comes from a minister who is responsible for home affairs. That ministry deals with the legality of civilians and you asking people to question their own constitutional rights,” the human rights activist said.
“A lot of persons were anxious to march because of what ministers of government were saying to them and other persons in the public, what I call the political actors. They come and try to pretend that they are objective and thinking objectively and speaking objectively when we know what the intention is. Because if you were objective, you would tell every single individual to march if you want to, stay home if you want to but it’s your democratic right. You do not dissuade people from exercising that fundamental right.”
Dujon also had a message for Minister of People Empowerment Kirk Humphrey who introduced the Child Protection Bill in Parliament. She urged him to focus on his responsibilities as a minister and on the issues that the group had pointed out to him.
She insisted the proposed legislation had a number of inconsistencies, especially as it relates to indecent exposure and buggery, noting that the language of the bill was not clear and was left up to interpretation.
Dujon said the group would soon submit a document with recommendations to the Government.
“Corporal punishment is effectively banned contrary to what the minister [Humphrey] is saying. When you read the bill, it tells you what physical punishment is and it explains what physical punishment is. So if this bill is passed, corporal punishment would effectively be banned and that is why I’m saying that the way the bill is drafted is arbitrary and is contradictory,” she contended.
“We want to ensure whatever we do for our children, our grandchildren and for this country, that it is done well. So when we come and ask you [Humphrey] to do it better, it’s not like we’re attacking you, it’s that we’re telling you that we expect you to do better. We want to challenge you to go back to the drawing board and do what is right. So that when we see the final bill, you bring a bill that reflects all of the concerns that we’ve raised and does not violate the rights of parents and does not violate the rights of children in any form.”
(SZB)