_edited.png)
Yesterday, the Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago, Faris Al-Rawi proposed a bill to amend the Sexual Offences Act. This amendment would most notably expand the punishable offences under this act to include offences such as “voyeurism”, “revenge porn” and “upskirting”.
This decision by the AG, first presented on December 7th of 2021 follows a trend of governments around the world seeking to keep up with the legal demands of a rapidly changing digital landscape and one in which the rate of online sexual abuse continues to grow at an alarming rate.
Understanding Revenge Porn
An article by Lawtons Solicitors states that revenge pornography, also referred to as online sexual abuse, “ involves the distribution of private and personal explicit images or video footage of an individual without their consent, with the intention of causing them embarrassment and distress.”
Despite growing awareness of revenge porn and its impacts, the number of persons who have become victims of this heinous crime continues to increase. In the United Kingdom, for example, revenge porn victims have doubled in the last two years with women making up the majority.
Here in the Caribbean, this trend of prevalence persists. It feels like at least once a month there’s a “nude leak scandal ” or the exposure of a nude-sharing group chat trends on social media.
Therefore, it comes as no surprise that under these circumstances, the AG saw the importance of introducing these amendments.
The Sexual Offences (Amendment) Bill
A screenshot of a thread published by local feminist NGO Feminitt
In 2014, Israel became the first country to make revenge porn a punishable offence under the law and since then many countries have adjusted their own legislation to follow suit including the United Kingdom, the United States, New Zealand and Australia amongst others.
Hence, it’s only fitting that Trinidad and Tobago is now joining this growing list of countries that have decided to implement anti-revenge porn legislation.
The most notable amendments outlined in this bill can be found in Sections 22A, 22B and 22C.
Section 22 A deals with voyeurism which it describes as:
“ observing another engaged in a private act without reasonable consent with or
without the use of equipment;
viewing beneath the clothing of another with or without equipment with the intention of viewing the private parts of said person whether covered or uncovered without consent or without reasonably believing that the person gave reasonable consent;
taking, capturing, recording, streaming, storing, publishing or transmitting through
any device or computer an image-based recording of the private parts of another
without consent or reasonable consent where said person has a reasonable
expectation of privacy. “
Sections 22 B and C deal with the taking and sharing of intimate images without consent which includes images that are distributed on and offline. Additionally, section 22 B also addresses the altering of images to make them appear to be intimate images and sharing them without consent, a phenomenon known as “deep fake pornography.”
Penalties were also outlined in the bill which ranged from TT $250,000 to $750,000 and up to 5 years in prison.
Finally, the bill made reference to similar amendments that would be made to the Children Act.
In his presentation of the bill and its importance, to parliament on Tuesday, the attorney general made reference to a 2015 case Ho vs Simmons wherein Therres Ho filed an action against her ex-partner for distributing intimate images of her without her consent to further stress the necessity of this bill.
The AG emphasised that this bill was necessary to protect the most vulnerable in society. He also highlighted the significant impact that the dissemination of intimate images can have on the mental and physical wellbeing of victims by referencing a case that occurred in Egypt, which he described as being similar to what occurs in Trinidad.
What’s next?
While this bill does demonstrate a step in the right direction, there’s still a lot more that needs to be done to ensure that these offences are prevented and that when they occur victims of such acts are protected and readily able to seek justice.
This concern is perhaps best articulated in a point raised by Senator Jayanti Lutchmedial wherein she identifies an “implementation deficit”. In a quote, she states, “I was in the criminal court for quite some time and dealt with victims and I will tell you that a law and a statute book never saved a woman’s life, it never prevented the shame …it never prevented the hurt,” she continues, “those things don’t make a difference it is implementation.”
Furthermore, she goes on to question whether the government has the capacity and the capability to detect and convict persons of the crimes outlined in these amendments.
She goes on to query, “does our cyber-crime unit in T&T have the training, technology and the capacity to implement this legislation?”
Understanding that between the period of 2017-2021 there were 2,282 reported sex offences and that only 647 of these offences were detected (28.3%), the points outlined by Senator Lutchmedial become quite sobering.
What good is progressive legislation if the mechanisms for detection and conviction fail?
While we do commend the government on the introduction of such progressive legislation, we wait with bated breath to find out if these statutes will amount to added protection for those that are most vulnerable.
To view the full parliamentary sitting, click here
To read the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Bill Essentials, click here
About the Author
Sapphire Alexander (she/her) is an intersectional Caribbean feminist and the founder of Caribbean Feminist. In addition to her work at Caribbean Feminist she serves as an advisor for FRIDA, a Queen's Commonwealth Trust Network member as well as a member of the young feminist coalition, Transform Education. Sapphire is passionate about women's rights, intersectional feminism and social justice.
Comments