A HIGH COURT judge has made a damning indictment of an internal facial hair policy of the prison service “which has the effect of discriminating against prison officers based on race.
“It is outrageous that in 2024, the commissioner is still applying the policy…This conduct cannot be condoned in a multi-ethnic and inclusive society such as Trinidad and Tobago,” said Justice Margaret Mohammed who held the clean-shaven policy affected all prison officers of African descent and mixed race.
The judge’s condemnation of the policy formed part of her ruling on a challenge brought by prison officer Lorenzo Marajh, who was denied medical exemptions for his pseudofolliculitis barbae or ingrown hairs and razor bumps.
He was also denied a medical exemption to wear a specific type of footwear because of heel spurs.
In her ruling, Mohammed said Marajh was treated differently. She has also declared the policy unconstitutional, illegal, null and void.
She said while she accepted the prison authorities were entitled to make policies to instil discipline, uniformity, tidiness and cleanliness among prison officers, there needed to be “weighty reasons” to justify a policy treating someone differently based on personal characteristics such as race.
“There was no evidence that the functions and duties performed by prison officers were hindered by facial hair.
“Given the multi-ethnic and inclusive society of Trinidad and Tobago and the respect for all ethnicities and religions in the twenty-first century, a beard can be kept while still maintaining high standards of appearance,” the judge said.
She also said in the absence of “cogent evidence,” there was no reasonable justification for treating those prison officers who can maintain a clean-shaven face without adverse consequences to health differently from other officers who cannot because of their racial and genetic composition.
“In those circumstances, I am of the view that there is a significant imbalance between the right of the claimant and other persons of African or mixed descent and the objectives of the policy, which makes it disproportionate.
“As a consequence, the policy infringes the claimant’s constitutional right to equality of treatment and protection of the law as he is being treated differently when compared to other prison officers on account of a condition that is linked to or is a byproduct of his racial origin and genetic makeup.”
She also held that Marajh’s right to protection of the law was breached because of the lack of reasonable justification for the policy. She further found that the commissioner’s failure to grant him the exceptions was “irrational, illegal and disproportionate,” since he (the commissioner) was not medically qualified to make any kind of assessment on an exemption based on medical grounds. Marajh had received 16 medical exemptions from shaving before he was denied in 2023.
“Indeed, there is also no provision in the Prison Service Act or the Prison Service Regulations (Code of Conduct) which gives the commissioner a
