The Anti-Gang Bill, 2010, ("the Bill"), was introduced in the House of Representatives on July 16.

It is Government's expectation that its enactment and subsequent enforcement will have the effect of suppressing associations which have been created to promulgate criminal or unlawful activities thereby leading to the improved protection of the public.

Given that the Bill is inconsistent with sections four and five of the Constitution it must be passed by a special majority of three-fifths of the members of both the House of Representatives and the Senate.

The primary issue which arises, is, will this proposed piece of legislation change the underlying dynamic of gang activity?

How much does the Bill actually have to do with effective law enforcement?

There is no question that Trinidad and Tobago is facing a crisis situation which calls for drastic measures, however, this proposed piece of legislation should be an additional step to be coupled with deploying increased resources on law enforcement, crime prevention and the effective enforcement of existing criminal laws.

Undoubtedly, there are many relevant pieces of legislation on our statute books currently which are not properly or not at all enforced.

This situation should be addressed with the same form of urgency.

In an article published in the Harvard International Review and written by Bilyana Tsvetkova entitled, "Gangs in the Caribbean, a Problem with International Consequences", the author states that "…in Trinidad and Tobago the conviction rate for murders was less than one per cent in 2007…both the country's Chief Magistrate and the Director of Public Prosecutions commented on the unprofessional status of the criminal justice system, which was also described by the Law Association of Trinidad and Tobago to be in "virtual collapse". Until the criminal justice system is reformed, law enforcement initiatives will continue to be constrained."

Together with legislation such as this present Bill, it is necessary to modernise our law enforcement and judicial systems.

In the absence of this, it is unlikely that gangs and consequent gang violence will be diminished to a significant degree.

Another key issue facing our society is the economic loss that the proliferation of gangs and gang violence is causing the business community in that it results or certainly can result in both foreign and domestic investment being diverted elsewhere.

The tourism industry is also being negatively affected, which we can ill afford given the importance of tourism to Tobago.

The Bill, if passed and subsequently enforced, could lead to significant benefits for Trinidad and Tobago.

We must, nonetheless, balance these potential benefits of the Bill to the business community and to all of us as individuals seeking greater security in our domestic affairs against the rights of citizens of Trinidad and Tobago as a whole.

The proper exercise of the powers reposed in our local law enforcement agencies by the Bill is critical.

In examining the Bill there are two sections which should be examined more closely with a view to their possible amendment before the Bill is passed. They are sections 5(1) and 12.

Section 5(1) should be of extreme concern to us all as responsible members of society. The entire Bill is undoubtedly draconian, however, this section goes too far. Section 5(1) is as follows:

"5(1) It is hereby declared that gangs are unlawful and any person-

(a) who is or attempts to become a member

of a gang; or

(b) who professes to be a gang member when in fact he is not, whether by telling anyone that he is a gang member or otherwise suggesting to anyone that he is a gang member,

commits an offence and is liable on conviction to imprisonment for twenty years."

How can attempting or professing to be a gang member when in fact one is not, make one liable to such a stringent conviction as 20 years in prison? This is especially dangerous in a society such as ours where hearsay is rampant. It also leaves too much room for mischief, vindictiveness and false allegations against one's enemies.

Subsection (a) should be split so that a person who is in fact a gang member is subject to 20 years in prison whereas a person who attempts unsuccessfully to become a gang member should be liable upon conviction to a lesser penalty, in prison.

Similarly in Subsection (b) the penalty for professing to be a gang member when one is in fact not, should be reduced to a lesser penalty.

Section 12 states that from the date of commencement the Act shall continue in force for five years.

The purpose of a duration clause such as this is that the government of a country does not usually want draconian legislation on the statute books for an indefinite period.

It is suggested that a shorter duration such as three years would be more desirable.

Should the legislation prove effective, its duration can then be extended.

In conclusion, the Bill could reasonably be anticipated to curb criminal activity in our nation by giving law enforcement officials one more avenue via which to curtail and discourage gangs and their criminal activities.

Once again it must be reiterated the utter importance of proper and responsible enforcement of this Bill.

The rights of all our citizens must be guarded.

One has the right to safety and security whilst the other has the right to justice and fairness.

A proper balance must be struck when imbuing law enforcement with such draconian powers as these.

In the end only time will tell if and to what extent the Bill has been effective.