Teen challenges ‘safe house’ detention

According to his lawsuit, being argued by his attorney Anand Ramlogan, SC, the teenager is being held in solitary confinement, which is not a normal consequence of being on remand.

“It is a form of punishment,” Ramlogan argued at the trial being heard by Justice Vasheist Kokaram.

In January, Kokaram granted leave to the boy, whose mother brought the action, complaining that her son was being kept in solitary confinement and was depressed.

He was moved to the house after Kokaram ruled in May last year that the YTC was not suitable as a remand facility for young offenders. He held that confining juveniles with adults at the YTC and the Women’s Prison in Arouca amounted to cruel and unusual punishment.

He ordered that the juvenile should be placed in a community residence to be determined by the Children’s Authority.

The teenager was put in the house because there are no community residences in Trinidad and Tobago.

According to the lawsuit, the child’s detention at the house amounted to solitary confinement and was illegal, unconstitutional and cruel and unusual punishment.

He is said to be suffering from depression, loneliness and frustration, as he was the only person in the house other than the staff. He has also told his mother he was “so lonely that it hurt”, and on one occasion escaped from the house by destroying the burglarproofing in his bedroom.

His mother called the police, who took him back to the house, despite her son begging her not to send him back.

The guards at the house, according to the mother, did not even know he had gone missing.

In the lawsuit, the teenager’s mother is asking for him to be immediately released into her custody until the authorities find a suitable community residence as provided for under the Children Act.

Ramlogan argued that there was no evidence the teenager posed a threat to the welfare of others, and the move to secure his welfare has instead resulted in an unhappy and unfortunate state of affairs. He also reminded the court that a prisoner on remand is presumed to be innocent and the teenager was “worse off” than other teen remanded prisoners, since he is being isolated from interaction with his peers.

Testifying yesterday was independent expert Dr Rona Hollingsworth, who said while the teenager had developed coping mechanisms, he had difficulties with lonely periods and wanted to be around people.

She said it appeared he was being left to his own devices most of the time at the location where he is being kept.

Asked by the judge if that meant he should be taken to a public school, Dr Hollingsworth said yes, if it could be arranged.

“Whatever could be found for him to interact [with his peers],” she said. In its response, the Children’s Authority denied that the teenager was being held in solitary confinement and that not being with his peers equated to actionable solitary confinement or inhumane treatment.