Dear Editor,
I have noted with some concern the reports in the media on the imposition by the Jamaica Constabulary Force (JCF) of what can be referred to as ‘juvenile curfews’ (imposed on youth in those parishes who are 17 years of age and under), to ensure that they are not on the streets after 9:00pm, in the parishes of St James and Manchester regarding.
Presumably, the motive to implement this measure stems from the involvement of juveniles in criminal activities. I don’t know how many of our youth under 17 years of age are, in fact, involved in criminal activity, and whether such measures deter criminal activity.
There is no such evidence to support any such claim. Isn’t this measure fraught with danger, since it allows our police to conduct profiling of youngsters and gives them probable cause to stop, search and even detain juveniles who are in breach of the curfew?
The relationship between juveniles and our police is already strained. Is this measure not likely to exacerbate the tension between them?
I hope that the juveniles most likely to be targeted and affected are those from the lower socio-economic grouping, as that would be even more discriminatory and unacceptable? For a police team that is understaffed, with limited resources, and already buckling under the stress of dealing with and preventing adult criminal activity and enforcing the laws, is it wise to add this responsibility?
My greatest concern, though, is whether juvenile curfews are in fact constitutional and can be imposed at the whim and fancy of the JCF. It appears that this measure gives the State the right to interfere with citizens’ method to raise their children.
In my opinion, no matter how good a motive as this might be, it is unconstitutional and should cease. The Office of the Public Defender should stand guard to ensure that this practice is discontinued.
Colonel Allan Douglas
Kingston 10
alldouglas@aol.com
I have noted with some concern the reports in the media on the imposition by the Jamaica Constabulary Force (JCF) of what can be referred to as ‘juvenile curfews’ (imposed on youth in those parishes who are 17 years of age and under), to ensure that they are not on the streets after 9:00pm, in the parishes of St James and Manchester regarding.
Presumably, the motive to implement this measure stems from the involvement of juveniles in criminal activities. I don’t know how many of our youth under 17 years of age are, in fact, involved in criminal activity, and whether such measures deter criminal activity.
There is no such evidence to support any such claim. Isn’t this measure fraught with danger, since it allows our police to conduct profiling of youngsters and gives them probable cause to stop, search and even detain juveniles who are in breach of the curfew?
The relationship between juveniles and our police is already strained. Is this measure not likely to exacerbate the tension between them?
I hope that the juveniles most likely to be targeted and affected are those from the lower socio-economic grouping, as that would be even more discriminatory and unacceptable? For a police team that is understaffed, with limited resources, and already buckling under the stress of dealing with and preventing adult criminal activity and enforcing the laws, is it wise to add this responsibility?
My greatest concern, though, is whether juvenile curfews are in fact constitutional and can be imposed at the whim and fancy of the JCF. It appears that this measure gives the State the right to interfere with citizens’ method to raise their children.
In my opinion, no matter how good a motive as this might be, it is unconstitutional and should cease. The Office of the Public Defender should stand guard to ensure that this practice is discontinued.
Colonel Allan Douglas
Kingston 10
alldouglas@aol.com