Jensen La Vende

Se­nior Re­porter

jensen.lavende@guardian.co.tt

Po­lice Com­mis­sion­er Al­lis­ter Gue­var­ro has launched an in­ves­ti­ga­tion in­to how the iden­ti­ty of an al­leged vic­tim of sex­u­al as­sault was leaked on so­cial me­dia.

The launch of the probe came hours af­ter the Law As­so­ci­a­tion called for the mat­ter to be prop­er­ly in­ves­ti­gat­ed.

In a me­dia re­lease, Gue­var­ro said he not­ed with grave con­cern the state­ments is­sued by the Law As­so­ci­a­tion of Trinidad and To­ba­go (LATT) re­gard­ing the al­leged leak­ing of sen­si­tive in­for­ma­tion, in­clud­ing the name, im­age and con­tents of a state­ment giv­en by the com­plainant in a re­cent sex­u­al as­sault case.

“This in­ves­ti­ga­tion will seek to de­ter­mine how this con­fi­den­tial in­for­ma­tion en­tered the pub­lic do­main and to iden­ti­fy and hold ac­count­able any per­son(s) found re­spon­si­ble for breach­ing the law or in­ter­nal pro­to­cols,” Gue­var­ro said.

The al­leged vic­tim has ac­cused promi­nent at­tor­ney Mar­tin George of sex­u­al of­fences that al­leged­ly took place at his Dun­don­ald Street, Port-of-Spain of­fice on March 22 this year.

George is cur­rent­ly on $150,000 bail af­ter ap­pear­ing in court on charges of in­de­cent as­sault and griev­ous sex­u­al as­sault on Wednes­day. He has been or­dered to al­ways re­main some 500 feet away from the al­leged vic­tim and make no con­tact with her, ei­ther di­rect­ly or in­di­rect­ly.

In a me­dia con­fer­ence on Thurs­day, George dis­missed the al­le­ga­tions as mere­ly an at­tempt to tear him down be­cause he is a black pub­lic fig­ure. He said as a fa­ther of three daugh­ters, the broth­er of six sis­ters and the boss where al­most 80 per cent of his staff are women, he has the high­est re­spect for women.

In their state­ment yes­ter­day, LATT re­mind­ed the pub­lic that Sec­tion 32 of the Sex­u­al Of­fences Act, Chap. 11:28, makes it a crim­i­nal of­fence to pub­lish or broad­cast any in­for­ma­tion like­ly to lead to the iden­ti­fi­ca­tion of a com­plainant in a sex­u­al of­fence mat­ter. This law, the as­so­ci­a­tion stressed, ap­plies to both tra­di­tion­al and dig­i­tal me­dia users.

LATT said: “The ra­tio­nale be­hind this pro­hi­bi­tion is to pro­tect vic­tims of sex­u­al of­fences from fur­ther trau­ma, stig­ma, and pub­lic scruti­ny. The unau­tho­rised dis­clo­sure of sen­si­tive in­for­ma­tion not on­ly breach­es the law but al­so un­der­mines the dig­ni­ty, pri­va­cy, and safe­ty of the per­sons in­volved.”

Sec­tion 32 (2) of the law states: “A per­son who pub­lish­es or broad­casts any mat­ter con­trary to sub­sec­tion (1) is guilty of an of­fence and li­able on sum­ma­ry con­vic­tion to a fine of twen­ty-five thou­sand dol­lars and to im­pris­on­ment for five years”

In 2013, Crime Watch host Ian Al­leyne plead­ed guilty to iden­ti­fy­ing the thir­teen-year-old vic­tim of rape and was fined $30,000. In de­fault, he would have served 72 months in prison. The charge came af­ter he broad­cast a video on three sep­a­rate oc­ca­sions dur­ing his pro­gramme in Oc­to­ber 2011.

Yes­ter­day, Com­mis­sion­er Gue­var­ro said: “The TTPS wish­es to un­der­score that the law is un­am­bigu­ous re­gard­ing the man­ner in which sex­u­al of­fences in­ves­ti­ga­tions are to be con­duct­ed, par­tic­u­lar­ly con­cern­ing the pro­tec­tion of the iden­ti­ty and pri­va­cy of vic­tims. The Sex­u­al Of­fences Act and re­lat­ed laws ex­ist pre­cise­ly to safe­guard vic­tims from fur­ther trau­ma and to en­cour­age the re­port­ing of these se­ri­ous crimes.”

He added that the TTPS re­mains stead­fast in its com­mit­ment to up­hold­ing the law, pro­tect­ing vic­tims, and en­sur­ing that all in­ves­ti­ga­tions, es­pe­cial­ly those in­volv­ing sex­u­al of­fences, are con­duct­ed with the high­est lev­el of con­fi­den­tial­i­ty, pro­fes­sion­al­ism and sen­si­tiv­i­ty.

Gue­var­ro urged mem­bers of the pub­lic and the me­dia to re­frain from shar­ing or pub­lish­ing any ma­te­r­i­al that could fur­ther ex­pose or harm the al­leged vic­tim, and to al­low due process to take its course.

Mean­while, LATT al­so said the leak­ing of po­lice ev­i­dence, crime scene footage, wit­ness state­ments, and oth­er sen­si­tive ma­te­ri­als meant to re­main in the cus­tody of in­ves­tiga­tive au­thor­i­ties is trou­bling and is part of a broad­er and in­creas­ing­ly com­mon trend in T&T.

“This must not be­come the norm. The pro­tec­tion of the jus­tice sys­tem de­pends on main­tain­ing the con­fi­den­tial­i­ty of such ma­te­r­i­al un­til due process is fol­lowed,” it said.

The As­so­ci­a­tion al­so is­sued a di­rect ap­peal to the pub­lic, es­pe­cial­ly so­cial me­dia users, urg­ing them to re­frain from re­post­ing or shar­ing any ma­te­r­i­al that vi­o­lates the law or could harm the in­di­vid­u­als in­volved.

LATT’s call for a po­lice in­ves­ti­ga­tion came a day af­ter the As­sem­bly of South­ern Lawyers pres­i­dent, Saira Lakhan, in her per­son­al ca­pac­i­ty, called on the Cy­ber Crime Unit to probe the leak.

In a state­ment on Thurs­day, Lakhan, who is a se­nior or­di­nary mem­ber of LATT, said the leak­ing of the in­for­ma­tion is a “gross vi­o­la­tion of her (the al­leged vic­tim) pri­va­cy and dig­ni­ty.

“There must be con­se­quences for those re­spon­si­ble. Sur­vivors of sex­u­al vi­o­lence must not be sub­ject­ed to sec­ondary harm through un­eth­i­cal and ir­re­spon­si­ble ex­po­sure on­line.”

Lakhan said the in­ci­dent re­flects a broad­er, sys­temic is­sue of sex­u­al ha­rass­ment and abuse of pow­er in pro­fes­sion­al set­tings. She called for a change in cul­ture as it per­tains to sex­u­al mis­be­hav­iour.

“There is an ur­gent need for na­tion­al poli­cies, stronger le­gal pro­tec­tions, and en­force­able work­place stan­dards to ad­dress ha­rass­ment and en­sure ac­count­abil­i­ty—re­gard­less of sta­tus or se­nior­i­ty.”