De-criminalise marijuana or revise sentencing policy – GHRA

Jan 30, 2014 News

---

In alluding to the inconsistencies related to the sentencing of persons convicted of marijuana possession, the Guyana Human Rights Association (GHRA), in a statement issued yesterday, amplified its concern about recent comments made by Minister of Home Affairs, Clement Rohee.
Minister Rohee earlier this week rejected any possibility of Guyana legalizing the currently prohibited substance which is recognized as a religious herb by some individuals.
According to the GHRA, “While the recent categorical rejection by the Minister of Home Affairs of the possibility of decriminalizing the use and possession of marijuana may meet with a mixed reception, the incoherent and unfair manner in which the law is currently applied must surely be a matter of universal discomfort.”
The human rights body made reference to the “disproportionate harshness” of sentencing for possession of marijuana in contrast with the apparent “inability of the police or CANU ever to detect, much less convict the main suppliers of cocaine.”
The GHRA detailed a number of marijuana cases taken to the courts that are indicative of the lopsided course of justice that has been meted out over the years.
Making reference to a case in November last year, the GHRA detailed a court hearing where a woman was sentenced to 12 years imprisonment and fined $120, 000 on four charges for possession and trafficking of 2.8 grams of cannabis and one gram of cocaine.
It was particularly emphasized that it was the day after being found with the substance that the sentence was handed down.
“Several factors about this case are disturbing,” pointed out the GHRA, which stated that “the habit of separating ‘possession’ as a separate case from ‘trafficking’ for the purpose of increasing the sentence is perverse on the part of the police.”
In asserting that trafficking assumes possession, the GHRA noted “that a woman should be sentenced to three years for possession of 2.8 grams of marijuana at a time when many countries are actively de-criminalizing marijuana possession is bizarre.”
The woman in question has in fact received a further three years for possession of one gram of cocaine.
The harshness of the 12-year sentence, the GHRA noted, is counter-productive since it gives the impression that the risk is greater in trafficking marijuana than cocaine because ‘coke’ is more lucrative and the penalty is the same.
Another counter-productive feature outlined is the fact that people could be discouraged from ever pleading ‘not guilty’.
The GHRA observed that professional mules carrying kilos of cocaine through Cheddi Jagan airport “rarely, if ever, attract more than four years.”
A cursory review over the past three years, outlined by the GHRA, shows extensive discrepancy in sentencing ranging from a New Amsterdam man being imprisoned for five years and fined $4.9M for possession of 1.8 grams of cannabis while a woman received 18 months plus $30,000 for trafficking 150 grams of cannabis and eight grams of cocaine.
And then there was the case of a man walking home with his friend from a Bar who received three years and $20,000 for possession of three grams of cocaine and two grams of cannabis.
He informed the court that his friend was not charged because he paid the police $20,000 while he had no money to do so.
The GHRA also alluded to a case where an 18-year-old woman was remanded to prison for possession of 26 grams of marijuana found in a house after police had followed her.
As reported, bail was refused “because of the seriousness of the offence.”
The GHRA, commenting on the case at the time stated, “The practice of finding narcotics in a house and the police charging whoever happens to be on the premises is an abuse which has resulted in many innocent people being jailed over the years.”
“The standard operating procedure is to arrest a range of people in the hope that between them one will plead guilty. Many similar cases have seen men ending up in Camp Street and female partners in New Amsterdam prison for a statutory three-year sentence over small quantities of marijuana, working great hardships on children and everyone concerned,” pointed out the GHRA.
It was underscored by the GHRA that while sting operations by the police have their place in crime-fighting, in the context of policing in Guyana they nonetheless raise misgivings.
According to the human rights body, too, the widespread harassment by police officers of innocent citizens for bribes and other abuses of authority renders such approaches unsafe.
The circumstances of the charges against the woman who received 12 years, whereby the police went to her home to purchase drugs, leaves a lot unsaid, noted the GHRA. “Did she live alone in the house? Were any females involved in the sting? What promises were made that may have misled her to plead guilty?
The contrast between the prison terms handed down in haphazard fashion to the street runners and other ‘small fish’ contrast sharply with the inability of the police to put drug suppliers before the court, underscored the GHRA.
“It prompts the question whether the same thought ever crosses the minds of magistrates?”

---

---