Govt says explicitly supports open sex offenders register, after push-back against bill for closed register

Amid concerns about whether there were public consultations about having an open or closed register of sex offenders and calls for the proposed amendment to the Sexual Offences Act to be scrapped, President Irfaan Ali and Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo stated categorically that they support an open register.

Minister of Human Services and Social Security Dr Vindhya Persaud said the bill to amend the Sexual Offences Act to provide for a closed register was based on public consultations. “The bill was crafted based on the view of the public consultations, which overwhelmingly suggested a closed register,” she said in a Facebook post at 3:19 p.m. on Wednesday.

One minute earlier, at 3:18 p.m., Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo said President Ali has instructed that the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Bill, presented in the National Assembly on June 5th, be sent to a Select Committee.

Mr Jagdeo said Dr Ali has also indicated that it is “his view, and that of the Cabinet, that any register of sex offenders must be public.” “I strongly share this view,” the Vice President added.

Up to late Wednesday night the President had not stated his position on social media.

Echoing Mr Jagdeo’s post, the minister said the bill would be referred to a bipartisan parliamentary select committee. “My intention as subject Minister is to propose to have the bill taken to Select Committee in Parliament to have it further discussed by members. It will benefit from more scrutiny and views at that Committee,” Dr Persaud said.

Reacting to the Minister Persaud’s reference to public consultations, several persons indicated that they were unaware of them. “When and where was this public consultation held? When and where was it advertised?” asked Ms Jaya Manickchand, a sister of government minister Priya Manickchand.

Dr Persaud did not answer that question but stated that “these public consultations were done by Dr. Kim Kyte as the consultant through the Ministry of Legal Affairs.”

Another commenter recommended that the consultations be properly advertised and held again after which a matrix could be compiled and shared with the public to show that it was attended by and captured a broader spectrum of stakeholders which informed the decision of an open or closed register.

There were also mixed views about whether the sex offenders register should be closed, with one commenter cautioning that an open register does not allow convicts to rehabilitate but stigmatised for the remainder of their lives.

“It unfairly ruins the lives of innocent people who have been wrongfully accused, destroying their personal and professional futures before they can clear their names. Furthermore, it denies a second chance to individuals who made severe mistakes as teenagers often influenced by drugs, alcohol, or immaturity. If society offers murderers a path to rehabilitation and privacy after their sentence, we should offer the same opportunity for a second chance to these individuals,” he said.

“How would a closed register help anyone? Residents need to know who is living around them. It’s unfortunate that it took Guyana until 2026 to get this done and it’s of no use to anyone,” Harry Chowbey, another commenter said.

The small non-parliamentary opposition Alliance For Change (AFC) said the proposed amendment is unworthy of the National Assembly and amounted to a slap in the face of the many women, men, and children who have suffered sexual abuse. “It sends a troubling message that the concerns of victims are secondary to the interests of offenders,” the AFC said in a statement.

The AFC asked what makes the minister believe that offenders would willing comply with a requirement for them to report to a Toshao (Indigenous Amerindian Village Chief) in communities where there are no police.

That party also objected to the bill providing exemptions for certain offenders from being placed on the registry.

While most reasonable people would agree that records involving minors should, in appropriate circumstances, be sealed, the AFC wants to know who determines whether an offender is mentally disabled for the purpose of exemption.

“If a court has convicted an individual of a sexual offence, it suggests that any defence based on mental incapacity was either unsuccessful or insufficient to prevent a finding of guilt,” the AFC said.