Claudia Calleja
Life on offenders register ‘may breach human rights’
Listing people’s names on an offenders’ register for life may be in breach of their fundamental human rights, according to a lawyer who specialises in the field.
The offenders’ list, aimed at protecting children from sex offenders and other potentially dangerous convicts, is expected to come into force by the end of the year.
Justice Minister Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici told The Sunday Times that, through the Protection of Minors Registration Act, offenders would be placed on the register at the discretion of the courts and, once listed, their name would remain there for life.
The Bill, which will be discussed in Parliament next month, proposes that the list be kept at the law courts and will not be accessible to the public. However, institutions or organisations working with minors under 16 would be legally bound to consult it before employing anyone.
Human rights lawyer Therese Comodini Cachia explained that, while the register would bring peace of mind to concerned parents, the State had to balance the protection of minors with the rights of offenders.
“It is not really the introduction of such a register in itself that may cause concern in this respect, but more so the method in which the register is kept.
“Instances which have already been ruled as violating human rights include, for example, the indefinite retention of an offender’s name on the register or the lack of measures of review of the retention of the offender’s name,” Dr Comodini Cachia said.
Just last May, the European Court of Human Rights found that the system placing sex offenders in Scotland on a register for life, with no way of being removed, breached their human rights to respect for a private and family life.
The case involved a man who was placed on the sex offenders register indefinitely at the age of 15.
The decision followed a judgment of the UK Supreme Court, the highest in the land, that dismissed a Home Office challenge in relation to two English offenders who were on the register for life.
A 52-year-old man and a teenager convicted of rape successfully argued that the lack of opportunity to demonstrate they had reformed was a breach of their human rights.
Children’s Commissioner Helen D’Amato welcomed the long-awaited decision to introduce the register but was concerned it would not be implemented retroactively. This meant convicted paedophiles would not be listed.
“This presents a cause for concern and it is hoped a feasible solution will be worked upon to address the problems that the lacunae poses,” Ms D’Amato said.
Anthea Agius, from the Social Workers’ Association, said the register was a positive move but had to be accompanied by reformative measures to be truly effective.
“The paradox is that some offenders are minors themselves and need protection,” she said.
Ms Agius said the reality was that just because offenders were not allowed to work with children did not mean they would never come into contact with minors. For this reason emphasis had to be placed on reform.
She agreed that being registered for life could result in an imbalance of rights which was why there was a need for social and psychological assessment to guide the term of registration.
The idea to have a paedophile register surfaced in mid-2006 following a controversy involving the Malta Football Association, which had retained a 79-year-old convicted paedophile as a groundsman at the Pace Grasso ground in Paola that also doubles as a playing field for a nearby school.
The register, which will not be limited to sex offences, will come into force under the Protection of Minors Registration Act by the end of the year.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
'No need for early election if PM's...
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
16 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
James A. Tyrrell
Aug 4th 2010, 19:29
@D.Galea. I wouldn't say that I know a lot about such people but I have in the past had personal contact with cases concerning such individuals whilst working as a police officer. I know most of the offenders living in my own particular town although no doubt others have been moved here since that time. What I do know from that personal knowledge is that these people were never 'cured'. Even speaking to them in interviews they would admit that in their words although they were 'trying hard to curb their desires' they were still and always would be a threat.
The study on recidivism posed by sex offenders does not deal specifically with paedophiles but with sex offenders in general and therefore can't be used as a guide. I agree with you that paedophiles are small in number, thank God, compared to other offenders and that we must stay objective but I still believe that parents have the right to know if someone in their area poses a risk to their child.
James A. Tyrrell
Aug 3rd 2010, 19:24
The UK has introduced Sarah’s Law after the rape and murder of 8-year-old Sarah Payne by the paedophile Roy William Whiting. It is similar in execution to Megan's Law in the USA and gives parents the right to check if someone living in their area or indeed working with children has a history of offences against children. Every parent should have access to such information in order to protect his or her child.
Paedophiles are not like car thieves or shop lifters or pick pockets. They can’t be shown the truth and the light and suddenly become normal. For someone to be sexually attracted to a child requires him or her to have a badly wired brain to put it in a simplistic way. They will always remain a danger to children no matter how much help they receive and for that reason people must be aware of their existence in their locality.
Personally I would take it further and have the words ‘child rapist’ tattooed on their forehead.
D.Galea
Aug 3rd 2010, 23:43
Mr.Tyrell It's interesting you seem to know quite alot about such people but the truth is that in reality many studies have shown that a very small percentage are actually of the type you have just described. Please let us stay objective because this is a very serious matter so for the sake of our children let us not lead ourselves into some false sense of security.
http://www.oncefallen.com/Recidivism101.html
Ramon Casha
Aug 4th 2010, 05:46
Ok, here's the other side of that coin. In the US, those who produce child pornography are also placed on the register. So guess what happened when a number of teens took nude or semi-nude photos of themselves using their mobile to send to their boy/girlfriend ("sexting")? Yep, they were arrested and charged - if found guilty (which, according to the legal definition, they are), they will be placed on the register as child molesters.
http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article5516511.ece
It seems that, in their emotional enthusiasm to "protect the children", they forgot to... protect the children.
Now consider that Malta's laws are pretty vague on the subject. They do not define what constitutes "corruption of a minor", For instance, in one previous case, a man was convicted of it for grabbing a girl's behind. While definitely wrong, does it merit a life sentence? What about an 18 year old adult who has sex with a 16 year old (willing) minor?
Charles Sammut
Aug 3rd 2010, 17:23
The root of the problem is that the definition of 'human' is too wide.
Ramon Casha
Aug 4th 2010, 05:48
The problem is that there is no definition of what constitutes "corrupting a minor". What about an 18 year old adult girl who has sex with her 16 year old (willing) boyfriend? Would you also place her on this register for life?
Joseph Schembri
Aug 3rd 2010, 17:08
People are too short sighted to see that despotic states start with the persecution of the less 'desirable' elements in society then the grip on personal freedoms slowly grows. If only people would open their eyes and see how the maltese government and other large organisations are using private information about each and everyone of us....
"THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
THEN THEY CAME for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up."
What bitter irony that it is Minister Carm Mifsud Bonnici who is implementing these laws!
Ian Fenech
Aug 3rd 2010, 13:47
And what about those people who are known paedophiles who work with children and do not need to look for another job, such as priest and clergymen? Will they also be on this list??
Gordon Cook
Aug 3rd 2010, 12:42
This is the same attitude that is allowing a convicted child killer sue the Home office in the UK because he was attacked by a fellow prisoner. He obviously gets legal aid too. Please Malta don't go there, you have seen how the UK has become due to nanny state policies.
D.Galea
Aug 3rd 2010, 17:10
So you're suggesting that any human being can under certain circumstances be allowed to be beaten up or perhaps killed? Should ever one crime be a valid jusitfication for other crimes? I think it is good that Human rights in the UK are upheld but I see you don't have any faith in your justice system and you are certainly misguided if you think prisoners in Malta do not have the same of rights. If it did not it would be the society which would be commiting the crime of being less then human itself, we should never permit crime to let us stoop as low.
M. Vella
Aug 3rd 2010, 11:02
So a person who harms innocent children, commits rapes and the like is entitled to human rights?
Once an offender always an offender. There is no excuse!
Ramon Casha
Aug 3rd 2010, 13:16
Why not get rid of the trial altogether and hand the accused over to the mob? That would save a lot of time.
A.Attard
Aug 3rd 2010, 13:38
He is entitled to change....
Joe Vella
Aug 3rd 2010, 14:50
I agree with the legal opinion that the proposed legislation might not stand under scrutiny. I believe that a sexual offender is like any other convicted person and can be rehabilitated. Perhaps, names of sexual offenders should be struck of the Offenders list after 10 years if during that time no other sexual offence is committed or the Sexual offender is going through legal proceedings for a sexual offence.
Joseph Calleja
Aug 3rd 2010, 17:56
I agree with Joe Vella that 10 years on the pedophile list is enough, on the condition that the accused stays clean for those ten years. On the other hand we have to look out for the right of the abused child. If the pedophile is found guilty of abusing any other child in those then years then that name will forever stay on the list. Like any other crime a perpetrator should think about the consequences before committing the crime.
Louise Vella
Aug 3rd 2010, 10:01
The impact of sexual abuse is very large as it harms innocent victims and their families for the rest of their lives. The consequences are too serious to ignore. A child molester should never be allowed to come near children. The protection of children from sex offenders should be a top priority for any society. Who is more deserving of the law’s protection – sexual predators, or innocent children who are the most vulnerable members of society? Parents need to know who the sex predators are so that they do not unwittingly trust their children with sex molesters. Parents need to protect their children.
New laws should convey the importance our society puts on protecting all children from serious harm. Children are the most innocent among us so their protection must come first. We should never give special treatment to sexual predators. When dealing with such a serious matter as child abuse I think there's a very grave responsibility on everybody in positions of leadership to do everything possible to ensure the protection of children. Civil authorities should focus on making children safe before all other considerations.