By EARYEL BOWLEG
Tribune Staff Reporter
ebowleg@tribunemedia.net
FORMER Prime Minister Perry Christie said all offensive acts that cause pain to women must be looked at carefully, adding steps should be taken to protect victims.
Mr Christie gave his opinion after speaking at a National Training Agency event yesterday when he was asked if marital rape should be criminalised.
“You want to ask those questions of the government of today. The point of this is all offensive acts that cause pain - and pain of all kinds to women of our country - must be looked at carefully, okay, and we must always take steps that are pointed in the direction of protecting those people who are victims.
“Whatever level the steps are, be that legislation, must be aimed at being effective and it must be aimed at being able to serve the interest that it’s intended to serve,” he told reporters.
“So, whatever the debate is about, you begin with looking at the victims and understanding what it is you have to do to protect victims in terms of abuse of any kind. That ought to drive public policy — the complying urgency to extend levels of protection to people who are victims.”
National Security Minister Wayne Munroe recently spoke at a Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) men’s branch meeting about the issue. He said the offence needs to be called something other than rape if successful convictions are being sought.
“I can tell you, in my judgment, if we decide that we want consent to … in sex given in marriage to be able to be withdrawn at any time and for any reason, so that you can commit an offence of having intercourse with your spouse without their consent, if we want to succeed in getting convictions for it, we better call it something other than rape. That’s just the reality of it,” Mr Munroe said.
“When we engage in this debate, it should be in this fashion: What behaviour are we wanting to outlaw? After we define what behaviour we want to outlaw, we can write it down and you can come up with any name to call it. But if you call it rape, in the modern-day Bahamas, you will have a very low conviction rate for that.
“Then, you would only be successful if your objective was to call it that as opposed to (getting) people punished for it.”
The issue of marital rape has been a topic of debate for years spanning several administrations.
The last Ingraham administration aimed to criminalise all forms of marital rape in 2009 but the plan faced immense pushback and prompted uproar from religious leaders and many Bahamians. The Marital Rape Bill was ultimately shelved.
Comments
moncurcool 2 years, 9 months ago
This from the man who lead his party to campaign against giving women equality in the Bahamas just to win an election?
Flowing 2 years, 9 months ago
You got that right, hypocritical!
SP 2 years, 9 months ago
We voted this dancing pirate into oblivion so as not to ever hear from him again. Seems he didn't get the message.
STFU Perry!!
John 2 years, 9 months ago
Samson and Delilah
carltonr61 2 years, 9 months ago
Ulterior motives will drive this debate around as there are yet any data around from the Churches who perform marriages that the issue of rape exists. Pressure is coming from out of country from groups with an umbrella of anti family issues included letting your child choose his/her sex that is leading to suicide rates increases and parent bullying by Laws that encourage early sexual awakening upon the innocent and easily confused. Sadomasochism is a mindset during variations of thrills maybe but ulterior motives to get out of marriage first must be in there somehow. Again, there is zero data to carry on with this emotionally charged distraction.
FreeportFreddy 2 years, 9 months ago
WOW...you are so delusional it's almost impossible to believe.
Take off your tinfoil hat - there is not a conspiracy of pedophiles or any other crap.
ohdrap4 2 years, 9 months ago
You need to read "woke baby"
Francis_James 2 years, 9 months ago
We do have some data. We have a university which looks at these matters. We just choose not to read what the faculty write. Here is a link which you might find useful https://journals.sfu.ca/cob/index.php/f…
FreeportFreddy 2 years, 9 months ago
Don't confuse the crazies with actual facts...it does not fit there narrative so they will respond with 'what about (insert crap here)?"
John 2 years, 9 months ago
The problem in this country is most men in power panders to women under the guise or pretex of ‘looking out for the women.’ Of course, many get favors from these ( male) politicians which often includes sex and even secret fatherhood. And, of course, some of these women are married and the husband is clueless as to what is going on. He is actually taking care of children that is not paternally his, but since the law says ‘the husband is presumed to be the father of and child born within a marriage, he is still legally responsible.’ Then how is this connected to spouses who are in a marriage and do not want to submit? In fact they now want the legal power to bring rape charges on any spouse that attempts to enforce the benefits of their marriage. So this leaves the offended spouse the easier option to opt out of the marriage before it gets even to accusations of rape. So does this mean the divorce rate will increase? Or does it mean that the amount of (mostly women) wanting and willing to bring rape charges is so infantissimaly small it will not make a difference. But what will change is the spouse who will now be able to say ‘if you touch me one more time, I will holler R A P E!’
newcitizen 2 years, 9 months ago
'enforce the benefit of marriage' - Jesus John you are messed up in the head. You just wrote a whole paragraph justifying raping the person to whom you are married.
carltonr61 2 years, 9 months ago
All we are asking is to show the data if it exists on the amount of wife's that cry wife. Or is this narrative being forced on us without supporting data of proof. Then the argument is empty. Who is the complainant here. I see a bunch of single women with voting rights threatening the gov not married women, mist of whom think the idea preposterous.
Sign in to comment
OpenID