Dear Editor,

In Jamaica, citizens are often brought before the criminal courts to answer to charges against them. It is important to understand that such charges rest upon the foundation of mere allegations by others. Some allegations are so egregious that in the minds of the Jamaican citizens the rule of law takes a back seat and jungle justice takes over.

However, even as emotions may be at fever pitch when heinous wrongs are committed, citizens must be reminded that our constitution provides for the right of the presumption of innocence. This right is enshrined in the Jamaican Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (Constitutional Amendment) Act 2011 at section 16(5) which states, “Every person who is charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed to be innocent until he is proved or has pleaded guilty.”

This cornerstone of a fair legal system must be respected within and outside of the courtroom. In recent times, I have observed media houses publishing the accused’s names, their photographs, and other particulars relating to the accused person even before a trial has started. This act by formal and informal publishers is wholly untenable and presents a clear and flagrant breach of the accused’s right to the presumption of innocence.

These publications cause immediate damage to people’s reputation. For example, allegations relating to certain sexual offences can potentially destroy a person’s career and tarnish his/her reputation amongst family, friends, former colleagues, and well-thinking members of society in general. More often than not, even with a ‘not guilty’ outcome, the stigma of the allegations lingers for a lifetime. With social media, the names and photographs often remain permanently plastered on the internet.

I have also seen instances in which a foreign embassy has read the allegations regarding an accused person and the individual was promptly sent an e-mail to the effect that his/her visa has been revoked. With the advent of popular social media websites such as TikTok, Instagram, and X, news has the capability to spread far and wide and, inevitably, a public trial ensues which may sentence people’s reputation to life imprisonment.

One may argue that even when an accused has been acquitted, the court of public opinion may find that the accused ‘got away’ simply because he or she had good representation or as a result of some legal loophole or manoeuvre. Jamaicans often say, “If it nuh guh so, it guh near so.”

The debilitating impact of publishing the accused’s name and photo before he/she pleads guilty or has been found guilty of a criminal offence by a properly constituted court seeks to undermine this very fundamental principle of the presumption of innocence. It is a right that seeks to protect not only a few, but every single Jamaican that may be charged with a criminal offence.

Indeed, in South Australia it is an offence for the identity of a person charged or about to be charged with a sexual offence to be published. This prohibition extends to names, addresses, images, and any other information that would reasonably lead to the identification of the accused.

We must be cognisant of the fact that allegations are easy to make, and the damage is difficult to undo. Allegations made against an accused does not indicate that a person is guilty, and as such the presumption of innocence must be protected by the very citizens who it is intended to benefit.

Matthew Hyatt

Attorney-at-law

matthew.hyatt_1@hotmail.com