The main opposition United Progressive Party and in particular it’s Public Relations Officer Senator Damani Tabor has come under heavy fire for broadcasting a letter written by a minor who was the alleged victim of sexual abuse.
Social Transformation Minister Samantha Marshall while speaking in Parliament this morning described the move as insensitive and a threat for justice to be served.
“What this child does not need is her name being tossed around in the school yard and every street corner and she certainly does not need the PRO officer of a political party reading a letter that she wrote to her father on the airwaves. A part from the damage that this sort of public airing a child’s pain does, it also contributes to possibly denying her the justice to which she is entitled,” she said.
Marshall, who is also an Attorney at Law, said Tabor’s move could have perverted the course of Justice.
“Mr. Speaker, it is important that jurors be selected who have not developed a prejudice against the alleged victim or the accused, but in this instance I would say that the PRO of the United Progressive Party by his publications and his utterances may have just done that and in doing so he could very well have perverted the course of Justice,” she noted.
Tabor read the letter on air on the UPP-aligned Crusader Radio approximately a week ago, and the UPP Political Leader Harold Lovell, said the move said that all efforts were made to conceal the identity of the 13 year old girl.
Marshall said she was saddened by the move.
“I am saddened by the PRO’s crass and insensitive action and his father is an attorney and sure had he gone to him for advice he would have received it. If the UPP PRO actually cared about justice for this child, he would have respected the laws and our justice system and would have kept the identity of the accused out of the public forum,” the disgruntled MP added.
The Social Transformation minister further criticized the UPP’s Political Leader Harold Lovell, an attorney for defending the PRO’s move.
“I doubt the PRO prejudicial decision to interfere in an active police investigation is of his alone, he could not have taken this decision without consulting first with the political leader of his party..it is on public record that he defended the at of his PRO,” she continued.
She said Lovell should have known better as a practicing attorney himself.