AG vows jail time for gang members

Gang members have been put on alert; membership of a gang will soon be a criminal offence in Barbados once the Criminal Gangs (Prevention and Control) Bill becomes law.

“Jail, jail, jail is what awaits you if you belong to or associate with a gang,” Attorney General Wilfred Abrahams told the House of Assembly on Friday, warning those associating with gangs and gang members that the proposed law casts a wide net and carries severe penalties.

“The government is dropping the hammer on gangs. The government is taking back control of Barbados.”

He added: “If you’re taking pictures demonstrating gang signs and you put them on your Instagram or your social media, that is evidence of you associating or affiliating with a gang, and you may leave yourself open to a charge. 

“You may defend it at the end of the day, but you would do your perp walk across the courtyard. By having said to all and sundry and posted it that I am affiliated with this gang, and I want the whole world to know it. People now need to think about belonging to a gang. Belonging to a gang is a criminal offence in Barbados.”

Abrahams sought to clarify what constitutes a gang under the proposed legislation, noting that the definition was the subject of extensive discussion during the drafting process.

“A gang means any association, organisation, group, alliance, network, combination, or other arrangement among three or more persons. Three or more persons, whether formally or informally affiliated or organised, and whether or not operating through a body corporate or other association.”

He explained that the legislation is aimed at criminal groups and not ordinary friends gathering together, stressing that the defining factor is engagement in criminal activity.

The attorney general also underscored the seriousness of the penalties contained in the Bill.

“We are not playing.”

“You start with ten, for more serious offences, it’s 15 to 30 or 15 to 35 but if you choose to associate with a gang, belonging to a gang, harbour anybody belonging to a gang, you are starting off looking at spending 10 years in jail.”

Provisions had been included to take account of minors and family relationships, Abrahams said, noting  that parents and people acting “in loco parentis” (in the place of parents) – such as teachers- would not be treated in the same way as others when dealing with their children.

Abrahams told the House: “We accept that parents look out for the children is we accept that that the relationship of a parent is in a completely different category. The other thing that we do is we accept that provisions have to be made for maturity levels, and we recognise, in relation to minors, that special dispensation has to be made in relation to minors.”

The courts would retain some flexibility when sentencing children convicted under the legislation, he added.

“Where offences are committed by children, the court retains a discretion to adjust the minimum sentence. So while the minimum sentence exists, there’s a discretion in there that the minimum sentence can possibly not be applied.”

But Abrahams stressed that the discretion afforded to judges would be more limited than under many other laws, particularly in cases involving the recruitment of children into gangs.

He noted that recruiting a child into a gang carries a stiffer penalty than recruiting an adult.

“This is about protecting society and this is about catching our young people and protecting our young people. A person who recruits a child to a gang commits an offense and is liable on indictment to imprisonment for not less than ten years and not more than 25, and please notice everything in here is liable on indictment.”

“Nothing in here is being dealt with at the magistrate’s court. If you are charged with this, you are going to the High Court. This is sending a message as to the gravity of the offences under this, and exactly where the government sees this in the hierarchy of crimes,” he stated.

The bill provides for an increased penalty of 15 to 25 years imprisonment where a child is recruited on the premises of a school or place of worship, or within 500 metres of either location.

Abrahams explained that exceptions allowing judges to impose sentences below the prescribed minimum would apply only in narrowly defined circumstances.

“The court may impose a lesser sentence than that specified in the subsections where the person who committed the offence was under the age of 18 years old at the time of the offense. So where a child recruits a child, we make an allowance for that to come under the minimum.”

The legislation also expands the types of evidence that can be used to establish gang membership. These include admissions of gang membership, assisting with gang-related activities, concealing evidence, sharing in the proceeds of criminal activity and making statements on behalf of gangs.

Abrahams warned that individuals who hide weapons, dispose of evidence or hold proceeds from gang-related crimes could also find themselves liable under the legislation.

He also sought to address concerns that residents of certain communities could automatically be branded as gang members because of where they live.

“We’re not targeting anybody based on where you live. We’re not targeting you based on where you live. We are targeting you based on what you do.”

He pointed to a provision in the bill that a person’s community of residence cannot be used as a factor in determining whether that individual is a gang member.

The attorney general further highlighted offences relating to counselling, financing or otherwise supporting gangs in the commission of gang-related activity, offences which carry penalties of up to 25 years imprisonment.

Addressing concerns raised by the legal profession, he maintained that attorneys-at-law would still be able to provide legitimate legal advice to clients but warned that no one could assist criminal activity under the guise of legal representation.

Abrahams also drew attention to provisions dealing with “tipping off” gang members about police investigations.

“So effectively if you obstruct justice, if you know the investigation is happening,” he said, warning that those who alert suspects to pending police operations could face prison sentences ranging from 10 to 25 years.

The legislation also targets retaliatory violence, which Abrahams said has become a recurring act of gang-related crime.

“You know that phrase, snitches get stitches. Well, if you retaliate against the snitch, then hear this one, you commit an offence, and you’re liable on conviction and indictment to imprisonment for not less than 15 and not more than 30.”

The bill also provides expanded detention powers, allowing police to detain suspects for up to 72 hours without a warrant, with applications to a judge required for any extension.

Special protections are also proposed for judges, magistrates, prosecutors, jurors and other officials involved in gang-related prosecutions.

“The judicial officers must be free to do their duty. They must feel protected by the state. They must be free to do their duty without fear of being threatened, having their family threatened.”

Abrahams noted that threatening judicial officers or jurors would attract the highest minimum sentence under the legislation, with offenders facing between 20 and 30 years imprisonment.

The AG also stressed that those charged under the legislation would not be eligible for bail at the magistrates’ court.

“You can’t get magistrate’s court bail for this. This is like firearms. If you want bail in this one, you need to go to the High Court.”

Abrahams also responded to criticism that the bill focused on punishment rather than rehabilitation, arguing that the government had already invested heavily in programmes aimed at diverting young people away from crime.

He cited initiatives including the Chapman Challenge, the Peace programmes, trust loan opportunities and skills training initiatives.

“This government has had programme after programme after programme aimed at empowering our young people, aimed at giving disadvantaged persons a chance, aimed at all of that.”

However, he insisted that the purpose of the Criminal Gangs (Prevention and Control) Bill was different.

“Do not look in this legislation to bail you out. This legislation is sending a message.”

Abrahams stressed the proposed law was intended to protect communities and restore public confidence.

(LG)