Dear Editor,

I appreciate the progressive thoughts and open-mindedness of the National Security Minister Robert Montague in his pronouncements about the proposed policy implementation of conjugal visits as rehabilitation made at the Diaspora Conference held at the Jamaica Conference Centre on July 24, 2017.

I note the Jamaica Observer article published on July 26 (‘Prisoners to be allowed conjugal visits’), and the editorial on July 27 (‘How will conjugal visits really work’).

Inimical to any progressive policy considerations is the well-known and embarrassing situation that exists in these dilapidated facilities, where rampant human rights violations are the norm and the removal of the dignity of its inmates are promoted.

We are agreed that with the inhumane treatment that is meted out to these prisoners, and the deplorable conditions in which they are forced to live, effective rehabilitation efforts would be challenging.

Speaking on a radio show on July 29, Montague stated that there is a 47 per cent recidivism rate that is attributable to the inadequate rehabilitation facilities.

How could we expect to reintegrate these prisoners into the society, and for them to make a positive contribution, when we are treating them like animals?

If we were proactive in making significant improvements to these dilapidated facilities with suitable housing arrangements, treating the prisoners with dignity and respect, and implementing proper rehabilitation measures, then we would not now have almost half of the prison population as repeat offenders.

Montague also stated that we the taxpayers have to fork out some $770,000 to maintain each prisoner each year. This is appalling in the context of the current recidivism rate.

A contentious element of the debate surrounding conjugal visits, which many may conveniently ignore, is that homosexual prisoners would be shafted.

According to Montague, it is only the prisoners who, among other things, are married and/or in common law relationships, as defined under our laws, would receive this privilege.

So, the homosexuals would summarily be denied this privilege (by automatic disqualification) because our discriminatory, oppressive and irrelevant buggery law facilitates it.

Apparently these homosexual prisoners do not have feelings and emotions like the heterosexuals, and they have no dignity that should be respected and promoted.

This one-sided, populist move would demonstrate further inequality and discrimination against homosexuals, as is stridently being promoted with the retention of this law.

Not because someone is a homosexual means that he should be treated any less than anyone else, or be given less or no privileges.

Policy initiatives, in tandem with the law, must accord with common sense and promote equality, while eliminating discrimination.

Dujon Russell

dujon.russell@yahoo.com