Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 2

REHABILITATE, NOT CRIMINALIZE CHILDREN OVER

CYBERBULLYING!

One of the earliest arguments I heard in favour of the Cybercrimes Bill 2016 was from the
Minister of Information, when in a press conference he lauded it as being about protecting
children. Children are cyberbullied, it was argued. The truth is that at that time there was
absolutely no provision in the bill which specifically dealt with the cyberbullying of children.
During the last two select committee meetings to which I was invited, an effort was made to split
the offence into two: one for cyberbullying of a child or vulnerable (which includes a disabled)
and another for cyberbullying of a person other than a child or vulnerable.
I wish to focus on and expand on my proposals for this area, as first expressed in Select
Committee meetings and in my recent letter to Reporters Without Borders (RSF). They are
twofold: 1. Cyberbullying should not be criminalized but should be addressed where necessary
as a tort in a civil court and 2. Preventative measures should be emphasized rather than punitive.
One of the greatest dangers of criminalizing cyberbullying is the fact that we can easily catch and
create criminals among children because lets face it, children cyberbully children. In S.V.G. the
age of criminal responsibility is 8 years old and a child can be detained as a juvenile offender by
about age 16 (although we have no juvenile detention centre to house them). In the revised bill,
the select committee and its invitees (NOT ME-I DISAGREE WITH CRIMINALIZING
CYBERBULLYING) decided to raise the penalties for the cyberbullying of a child or vulnerable
to 150,000 or 3 years in prison or both at summary conviction and 250,000 or 5 years or both at
conviction on indictment. This is higher than for the cyberbullying of a person other than a child
or vulnerable; in other words an Adult who is not a vulnerable. Of course this means that in a
case of a child who is convicted of cyberbullying another child, he or she, on the face of it,
already faces a greater maximum penalty than an Adult cyberbullying an Adult. Think about that.
Children sometimes say terrible things without considering the consequences; words that may
hurt, insult, shame, criticize etc. Is criminalizing them the answer? I think not. Remember a hand
was not lifted, no blood was shed by an act committed by the child. Furthermore, even the truth
spoken can be seen as cyberbullying under the vague, subjective and legally uncertain language
used in the definition of cyberbullying. Will we criminalize a child for repeating the truth in
cyberspace? In my letter to the RSF I said, I have proposed instead social intervention to
address the behaviour, involving schools administrations, parents and students in antibullying programs, victim-proof programs, education on tolerance and responsible use of
cyberspace and such like. I sincerely believe this is a better approach as a preventative measure
which will offer true protection of children; helping them to avoid bullying behaviour as well as
to not become victims of bullying. I have recommended models such as Tom Thelens Victimproof program in the U.S.A.

Do you know that in Trinidad & Tobagos Cybercrimes Bill 2016 they have a separate section
dealing with Child Offenders? And do you know the fines are significantly smaller (based on
age-16 years and over and under 16). More importantly, do you know their bill gives the court
the option of applying other measures which include not criminalizing the child? It says, In
determining the sentence of a child offender In any case involving a child offender, the Court
may
(a) place the offender in the care of a fit person;
(b) make an order for counselling or any other rehabilitative intervention or treatment or for
psychological evaluation and resultant assistance;
(c) make an order for community service pursuant to the Community Service Orders
(d) order that no conviction be recorded;
(e) order that the proceedings be sealed and not divulged without an order of the Court; and
(f) make such other orders as it deems fit.
These opportunities are geared towards rehabilitating the child and teaching them how not to be
bullies and I find the penalties (community service) to be more proportionate for children who
have engaged in cyberbullying. The order that no conviction be recorded is also good since it
does not criminalize a youth or child over words/communication online that may very well be
the truth. Other jurisdictions deal with cyberbullying among children in a strictly non-criminal
manner. They address most serious cases from a civil court stand point. It is clear to me that the
claim that the Cyberbcrimes Bill 2016 is about protection of children is an emotional argument
which lead to hasty adjustments of the section, without giving due reflection to the implications
and significance for the very children themselves. It begs the question-who really is this criminal
cyberbullying offence meant to deal with? You cant fool me that it is about protecting children.
It seems to be more about satisfying vendetta and revenge for some thin-skinned adults, even in
high office.

Anesia O. Baptiste

Вам также может понравиться