The Tribune

By EARYEL BOWLEG

Tribune Staff Reporter

ebowleg@tribunemedia.net

FREE National Movement Leader Michael Pintard said controversial comments made by National Security Minister Wayne Munroe regarding a child sex case can “cultivate the wrong mindset” among some in society, including law enforcement officers.

He said Prime Minister Philip “Brave” Davis must state his position relative to protecting minors and answer whether he still believes Mr Munroe is suitable for the job after his remarks.

According to Mr Pintard, Mr Munroe fails to recognise the negative impact of his utterances and refuses to correct himself even after well thinking people from many stakeholder groups pointed out to him how “terribly wrong” both his initial statement and subsequent press release were.

There has been significant commentary after the conviction of 40-year-old man charged with unlawful sexual intercourse with a 14-year-old girl. He was sentenced to four years in prison as part of a plea deal. After he serves his time, he will be on probation for three years. Although many observers felt the sentence was too lenient, Mr Munroe suggested it was too severe, arguing it was not rape and that the underaged girl consented.

Mr Munroe released a statement expressing deep regrets that his comments had caused public concern. However, he did not take back his earlier statements.

Despite public outcry for him to resign, Mr Davis said on Thursday he doesn’t think the minister should do so. He added he believed the situation was a learning experience for the minister and has taught him that it’s best to keep his personal views to himself.

Yet, the FNM leader said the minister’s comments were “wrong on multiple levels”.

“One, the remarks uttered by him have the real potential to cultivate the wrong mindset and culture among many in our society, including some law enforcement agents. The minister should be leading the charge to encourage greater sensitivity to the real victims of abuse or violation and the sensitivity we need must be seen from the point of investigation all the way through the trial. His statements were wrong on multiple levels.”

Mr Pintard added: “Two, any serious minister with assuring law and order is the advocate, first and foremost, for the victim of crime and for creating the right national environment where would-be criminals may be deterred from criminal acts. Therefore, it is unacceptable for him to be seen to be in defence of the perpetrator or would be perpetrators nor should he be in the business of indirectly or directly advising defence attorneys in the aftermath of their client’s crime. Are you the Minister of National Security or are you a defence lawyer?

“While there are real issues in some of our laws and concerns about the application of such laws at the time of sentencing a prudent minister would work with his colleague to put in place sensible sentencing guidelines as has been done in numerous jurisdictions. However, that debate was not what grieving families and a fed up public needed at that time nor do they need that discussion from their chief public servant responsible for law and order. He was wrong on multiple levels.

“Our children’s welfare should be our primary concern when we consider how to protect the most vulnerable. Therefore, our public statements and actions should send a clear message that there are deeply, deeply unpleasant consequences for anyone who exploits minors. We must not send the message to the most vulnerable that even after they have been harmed that their protectors, us policy makers, are so emotionally removed from their condition that we come across as if we are advocating for the perpetrator in the most flippant manner.”

The day after Mr Munroe’s controversial comments, Prime Minister Davis tweeted that adults needed to stay away from minors.

“Let’s be clear: grown men should stay away from children,” Mr Davis tweeted.

“The law is designed to protect children, who cannot meaningfully offer consent, and it should be enforced to the fullest extent.”

Meanwhile, Mr Pintard pointed out that in the aftermath of the controversy there are talks of increasing the age of consent from 16 to 18. But Mr Pintard argued this discussion should not shift focus from the deeply insensitive comments by the minister and the obligation by the Prime Minister to step in and restore confidence in his administration’s commitment to protect children.

“The fact that we are now willing to discuss the value of moving the age of consent from 16 to 18 because the view is that at 18 the female is more mature to decide on whether to engage in such an intimate act further shows how utterly tragic it is for a national leader to make the case that a 14-year-old possesses sufficient maturity and experience to consent to engage in sexual relationship with a much older man,” Mr Pintard said.