— on behalf of all victims of domestic abuse
WHEN GOD gifted Adam and Eve with Paradise, He gave them a choice that would have either enabled them to remain in the Garden of Eden, or live a life in which human frailties would impact the quality and comprehensive landscape of their lives, and the lives of all of their descendants. They made the latter choice.
The all-powerful Lord could have merely created Mankind with all the virtues, which he did, with the added dimension of allowing everyone the option to choose either the pathway to Heaven, or to follow Satan’s edicts.
This is the genesis of democracy, and the forerunner to all parliamentary configurations which are supposed to be the bastions of human laws and the caretakers of human rights.
Within the construct of humanity, there is one primary equation that should be inviolate — the sanctity of the family. But because of serious breaches in that bastion fortifying the protection of family units, intercessions are sometimes necessary to invest a degree of protective legislation into the equation, especially where there are spouses who batter their domestic partners repeatedly, but are yet set free, with the ultimate consequence of finally depriving that partner of her life.
And here I lay blame squarely at the feet of the guardians of the law, because theirs are oftentimes the decisions and the actions or inactions that determine the fate of the innocent victims, and the casualties of the demonic actions.
Hence, the various pieces of legislation driven by former Minister of Human Services and Social Security, Ms Priya Manickchand.
But sometimes legislation is not enough, and the justice system fails the society.
In response to concerns raised by columnist, Stella Ramsaroop about the Neesa Gopaul tragedy, where the young girl fell through the cracks of the system and eventually met her death at the hands of the very people she should have trusted most in the world, Ms Manickchand expressed appreciation at the public outcry over the case, and said that she was absolutely encouraged by the public outcry that was made after Neesa’s murder.
“I felt encouraged and inspired by that outcry, as child abuse and abuse of women is so often met with apathy from society in general that that alone sometimes is daunting.”
She said that, policy-wise, everything was in place for such a tragedy not to have happened. Manuals and protocols are written, training on said manuals done, and officers at the agency do only child protection work, as compared to other officers in the Ministry, who do general duties, which include so much that their expertise is sometimes stretched.
“It is incumbent on officers to do what is required of them, not be lazy or ignorant of laws and/or best practices when dealing with the nation’s children. If this does not happen, if officers do not do what they have sworn to do, what they are paid to do, then we cannot ensure that this does not happen again.”
Yet, on Friday last, a single father, a widower whose wife had died leaving him with three daughters to raise alone (see story on Page 14), was jailed by a magistrate for inflicting corporal punishment on his 14-year-old schoolgirl daughter who had, from all reports, been engaging in sexual activities with adult men since she was 13 years old.
Any single parent – male or female — would sympathise and empathise with a parent who single-handedly has to provide for the material and every other need of three girl children. It is a daunting task for anyone.
The man had reported her sexual activities and proclivities to the Brickdam Police Station, which should have resulted in the arrest of the adult male perpetrator with whom she had been engaging in sexual activities; and he also sought the help of the Child Care and Protection Agency (CCPA), which was the very agency that had failed Neesa Gopaul.
The father accused the agency of providing no response to his entreaties for help, and that no less than nine times he had appealed for help for his 13-to-14-year-old daughter.
In this society, this type of father, who is not derelict of his responsibilities toward his motherless children, deserves accolades. And any parent in such a situation would understand the utter frustration that drove him to commit an admittedly criminal act of inflicting corporal punishment on the girl.
The system has once more failed victims; and certainly the father himself is a victim of circumstances and an uncaring society, which has inflicted further injustice on him by jailing him instead of providing the necessary counselling, and even the help that he obviously needs.
What has the justice system achieved by jailing this father, obviously buoyed by the popular hype of domestic violence, without taking the extraneous circumstances into consideration? It has taken a father of minor daughters away from them. It has stopped the income flow into the home. Who will now provide the wherewithal for the survival of the girls while their father is locked away? And it may very well precipitate a situation where the father gives up on his delinquent daughter, who may in turn feel she has absolute freedom to pursue a destructive way of life, with all its implications; instead of inculcating the education and values her father was trying to instill in her.
The Minister had also said, following the Neesa Gopaul incident, “What we have to do is put in place enough measures to catch a lack of follow-up on a particular matter before it becomes too late.
“…this sort of horror obtains in many other countries that have services far more advanced in experience as well as resources than we do. Guyana faces the same challenges those other countries face in their child protective services, and while we have far less resources than most of those other countries, we are well on the way to putting those preventive measures in place.”
In 2008, Government published a national policy on domestic violence, titled “Break the Cycle, Take Control.” It is a five-year policy. In that publication, one of the issues highlighted to be confronted and offered is counselling for perpetrators, while in no way interfering with the policy to first address the safety of the complainant.
Government has also expanded Legal Aid services to six regions of Guyana, with an intention of furthering that service. Funding, to ensure a shelter stays open and available to victims of violence and their children has also been provided, and protocols that would be needed by the police, prosecutors, magistrates and social workers have been established.
In addition, Government has trained service providers who are to use those protocols.
Yet, despite these myriad interventions at the level of Central Government, the victims continue to fall through the cracks.
Spousal and sexual abuse, including incest and rape, continues unabated, and many partners have been murdered after prolonged instances of spousal abuse.

In an interview with the Chronicle, Minister Manickchand, speaking out of the box of her current portfolio as Minister of Education, and addressing issues that had been integral to her former mandate, said that under no circumstance should a woman remain with an abusive partner.
The phenomenon of domestic violence, posited the Minister, is not constrained to barriers of class, creed, religion, gender; and is a worldwide pandemic, with statistics from the USA recording an instance of domestic violence every 12 seconds.
She rejected the idea of domestic violence being a personal matter, and asserted that it is a crime against the state.
Referring to the comprehensive 1996 Domestic Violence Act and the new Sexual Offences Act, the Minister yet contended that the woman’s right of choice should be respected at all times; and she listed her reasons, among which is the inability for a female to make rational decisions while her emotions, as well as practical matters and considerations are involved.
While she agrees that it is incumbent upon the state to provide the mechanisms to facilitate self-empowerment for a victim of abuse to reach a stage where she can leave an abusive relationship of her own accord, Minister Manickchand is adamant that it is only when the woman is emotionally and psychologically ready that should happen; and that when she is ready to leave, which is almost always a very difficult decision for her, she should be given every cooperation by the various bodies on which she would depend for her eventual freedom, to facilitate the process of her leaving the abusive relationship with a partner she may probably still care for. This includes the police and the legal system.
In recognition that men are also victims, and that men also need to be equal partners in the fight to curb domestic violence in the society, the Men’s Affairs Bureau (MAB) was established, under Minister Manickchand’s watch, to facilitate holistic approach to resolution of the pandemic of domestic violence in society.
According to the Minister, MAB was established to create a facilitating mechanism by which men could have conversations on every issue; and to encourage men to vent their own concerns, which often leads to loss of control and eventual spousal abuse; to seek resolution to their own problems; to recognize that being emotional is not the domain only of female partners; to relate to situations that their counterparts may encounter; and to seek for and effect peaceful resolutions that can lead to compromises and even heal breaches in relationships, among other things.
The Minister, obviously time-constrained, concluded by sending a strong message to law enforcement bodies — that when a woman is ready to leave, then the relevant institutions and personnel must do their part by providing all the requisite adjunctive support necessary to facilitate that move away from that abusive, explosive and potentially murderous situation.