Georgetown : The Fundamental Rights enshrined in the Guyana Constitution include rights to equal protection, freedom of movement, freedom of expression and freedom from inhuman treatment. It was with this in mind that a study was conducted by former lecturer of the University of Guyana, Dr Christopher Carrico, with a view of creating conditions conducive to the violation of these basic rights for persons who make up the gay community.
Funded by the British High Commissions for Guyana and Barbados, the findings of the revealing study entitled “Collateral Damage: The Social Impact of Laws Affecting LGBT Persons in Guyana” was launched today at the Turkeyen University. Commissioned approximately one year ago by the University of West Indies’ Faculty of Law Rights Advocacy Project (U-RAP), the study is arguably the first such study done in Guyana and perhaps the Region.
It was designed to assess the effects of the enforcement, or the implicit or explicit threat of enforcement of laws against sodomy, same sex sexual activity, cross-dressing, loitering and vagrancy. Persons found guilty of buggery in Guyana can be sentenced with up to life imprisonment. Guyana also has laws against ‘gross indecency’ between males, and cross-dressing. These crimes carry punishments of up to two years imprisonment, and fines of not less than $7,000 respectively.
One of the main claims of this study is that even though some of these laws are not heavily enforced, “there are many ways in which judgments are made, and punishments are meted out long before there are trials.” The Carrico Study adds that “there are many effects that a law can have without charges for sodomy ever being prosecuted.”
Direct feedback was compiled from lesbian, gay, bi-sexual and transgender (LGBT) Guyanese, who gave their accounts on the effects of these laws. The respondents spoke openly on a range of issues including a number of injuries that were directly inflicted by the police and the courts, such as police harassment and abuse, arrest, prosecution, and conviction of crimes. Dr. Carrico argues that the vagueness of some of the crimes gives law enforcement officers wide discretion to harass sexual minorities even though the laws have applicability beyond LGBT communities.
Many respondents in the study expressed apprehension about reporting crimes that had been committed against them, fearing that charges may be brought against them. According to the study, many of the crimes committed against sexual and gender minorities are enabled because perpetrators know they will not be punished, or believe that they are privately enforcing the law.
The research conducted also examined the background effects of these laws in social control, surveillance, and discipline in the wider society. The study reveals too that the existence of these laws have affected all aspect of the lives of the respondents, including access to public entitlements like health care or social services. It further emphasised that one of the major effects of these laws was the degree to which sexual and gender minorities felt that they needed to regulate their normal behaviour at the workplace in order to have access to employment and a means of livelihood.
It is believed that while it is believed that few consenting adults are arrested and brought to trial for the ‘unnatural’ sex crimes, these laws pose little risk or harm to the human rights of sexual minorities. However, Dr Carrico has been able to ascertain that his qualitative study undertaken in the Georgetown area plainly disputes this and points to a range of serious negative social effects that can be related to the continued existence of certain laws.
As such it is believed that the findings can provide the basis for a more informed discussion on the implications of laws affecting sexual minorities in the Caribbean by parliamentarians, policymakers, lawyers, civil society, faith-based groups and ordinary citizens.
