Trinidad and Tobago

Located in the Caribbean, the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago – comprising the islands of Trinidad and Tobago, as well as several small islands – is a parliamentary democracy that declared its independence from Britain in 1962. It is one of the wealthiest in the Caribbean, due to its large reserves of oil and gas and unusually industrialized petrochemical industry.

The Republic’s inhabitants represent a range of belief groups, influenced by the successive periods of colonization to which the islands were subjected independently, as well as the use of forced labour on the plantations during the colonial period.[ref]Forde, Maarit. (2020). Religions in Trinidad and Tobago. Online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341056430_Religions_in_Trinidad_and_Tobago[/ref] As such, the islands are majority Christian (58%) – the largest denomination of which are Roman Catholic (22%). Hindus account for a further 18% of the population. Other smaller religious groups include followers of syncretic African religions. The non-religious account for 2% of the population.[ref]https://cso.gov.tt/subjects/population-and-vital-statistics/population/[/ref]

Constitution and government Education and children’s rights Family, community, society, religious courts and tribunals Freedom of expression advocacy of humanist values
State legislation is partly derived from religious law or by religious authorities
The dominant influence of religion in public life undermines the right to equality and/or non-discrimination
Government authorities push a socially conservative, religiously or ideologically inspired agenda, without regard to the rights of those with progressive views
‘Blasphemy’ is outlawed or criticism of religion (including de facto ‘blasphemy’ laws) is restricted and punishable with a prison sentence
There is state funding of at least some religious schools
Blasphemy or criticism of religion is restricted in law and is punishable by a fine
Official symbolic deference to religion
State-funded schools offer religious or ideological instruction with no secular or humanist alternative, but it is optional
Religious courts or tribunals rule directly on some family or ‘moral’ matters; it is legally an opt-in system, but the possibility of social coercion is very clear
Constitution and government
State legislation is partly derived from religious law or by religious authorities
Official symbolic deference to religion
Education and children’s rights
There is state funding of at least some religious schools
State-funded schools offer religious or ideological instruction with no secular or humanist alternative, but it is optional
Family, community, society, religious courts and tribunals
The dominant influence of religion in public life undermines the right to equality and/or non-discrimination
Government authorities push a socially conservative, religiously or ideologically inspired agenda, without regard to the rights of those with progressive views
Religious courts or tribunals rule directly on some family or ‘moral’ matters; it is legally an opt-in system, but the possibility of social coercion is very clear
Freedom of expression advocacy of humanist values
‘Blasphemy’ is outlawed or criticism of religion (including de facto ‘blasphemy’ laws) is restricted and punishable with a prison sentence
Blasphemy or criticism of religion is restricted in law and is punishable by a fine
The state is secular, with separation of religious and political authorities, not discriminating against any religion or belief
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report

Countries: no countries relate to this boundary condition

Religious or ideological instruction is mandatory in all or most state-funded schools with no secular or humanist alternative
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report

Countries: Angola, South Sudan, Tuvalu

Religious courts or tribunals rule directly on some family or ‘moral’ matters; it is legally an opt-in system, but the possibility of social coercion is very clear
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
No fundamental restrictions on freedom of expression or advocacy of humanist values
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report

Countries: no countries relate to this boundary condition

No condition holds in this strand

Countries: Lesotho, Uzbekistan

No condition holds in this strand

Countries: Andorra

No condition holds in this strand
No condition holds in this strand

Countries: no countries relate to this boundary condition

Localised or infrequent but recurring and widespread social marginalisation or prejudice against the non-religious

This condition is unusual in that it is applied in cases where there is some social discrimination, but it is not pervasive or nationwide. This condition is applied when there is sufficient background evidence to warrant the assertion that discrimination is not anomalous but widespread, and this condition may be applied for example even where if there is no legislative discrimination or where the non-religious may have legal recourse against such discrimination. However, societal discrimination (i.e. discrimination by peers, as opposed to state or legal discrimination) is not easily measured, and for this reason the Report does not currently have similar more severe boundary conditions to capture higher levels of social discrimination per se. In principle these may be introduced in future. However, we consider that countries with actual higher levels of social discrimination against the non-religious will generally already meet other higher level (more severe) boundary conditions under this thematic strand.

Countries: Albania, Botswana, Greece, United States of America

The dominant influence of religion in public life undermines the right to equality and/or non-discrimination

Applied when the influence of religion on public life undermines others’ rights, such as SRHR, women’s rights, LGBTI+ rights.

May be applied when the influence is overt (i.e. when religious laws are applied to undermine others’ rights) or covert (i.e. where religious pressure groups exert influence to affect policy)

Countries: Albania, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Bahamas, Belize, Bolivia, Brunei Darussalam, Burundi, Chile, Congo, Democratic Republic of, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Dominica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Eritrea, Eswatini, Fiji, Gambia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Hungary, Iran, Italy, Jamaica, Jordan, Liberia, Lithuania, Mali, Mexico, Moldova, Montenegro, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Nigeria, North Macedonia, Oman, Panama, Paraguay, Qatar, Romania, Russia, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Trinidad and Tobago, Ukraine, Zambia

Use of Conscientious Objection clauses resulting in the denial of lawful services to women and LGBTI+ people
Complete tyranny precludes all freedoms of expression and thought, religion or belief

Applied when overriding acts of oppression by the State are extreme, to the extent that the question of freedom of thought and expression is almost redundant, because all human rights and freedoms are quashed by authorities.

Countries: Afghanistan, North Korea

The non-religious are barred from some government offices (including posts reserved for particular religions or sects)
There is a nominal state church with few privileges or progress is being made toward disestablishment

Countries: Bulgaria, Norway, Peru, Rwanda

Religious or ideological indoctrination is utterly pervasive in schools
Expression of non-religious views is severely persecuted, or is rendered almost impossible by severe social stigma, or is highly likely to be met with hatred or violence
The non-religious are persecuted socially or there are prohibitive social taboos against atheism, humanism or secularism
There is significant social marginalisation of the non-religious or stigma associated with expressing atheism, humanism or secularism
Expression of core Humanist principles on democracy, freedom and human rights is brutally repressed
Religious authorities have supreme authority over the state

Countries: Iran

State legislation is partly derived from religious law or by religious authorities
Preferential treatment is given to a religion or religion in general

This condition is applied where there are miscellaneous indicators that organs of the state offer various forms of support for a religion, or to religion in general over non-religious worldviews, suggesting a preference for those beliefs, or that the organs of that religion are privileged.

Countries: Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Belize, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Burundi, Canada, Cape Verde, Colombia, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Liberia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Montenegro, Mozambique, Nepal, New Zealand, Nigeria, North Macedonia, Oman, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, San Marino, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Tunisia, Turkey, Tuvalu, United Kingdom, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Zimbabwe

Religious or ideological instruction in a significant number of schools is of a coercive fundamentalist or extremist variety

This condition highlights countries where schools subject children to fundamentalist religious instruction with no real opportunity to question fundamentalist tenets, or where lessons routinely encourage hatred (for example religious or ethnic hatred). The wording “significant number of schools” is not given a rigid quantification (sometimes the worst-offending schools are unregistered, illegal, or otherwise uncounted); however the condition is not applied in cases where only a small number of schools meet the description and may be anomalous, as opposed to being indicative of a widespread problem.

Countries: Bangladesh, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia

State-funded schools provide religious education which may be nominally comprehensive but is substantively biased or borderline confessional
There is a pattern of impunity or collusion in violence by non-state actors against the non-religious
Some religious courts rule in civil or family matters on a coercive or discriminatory basis
‘Apostasy’ or conversion from a specific religion is outlawed and punishable by death
‘Apostasy’ is outlawed and punishable with a prison sentence

Countries: Bahrain, Comoros, Jordan, Kuwait

State legislation is largely or entirely derived from religious law or by religious authorities
Anomalous discrimination by local or provincial authorities, or overseas territories
Religious or ideological instruction is mandatory in at least some public schools (without secular or humanist alternatives)
Government figures or state agencies openly marginalize, harass, or incite hatred or violence against the non-religious
Government authorities push a socially conservative, religiously or ideologically inspired agenda, without regard to the rights of those with progressive views
‘Blasphemy’ or criticism of religion is outlawed and punishable by death
Quasi-divine veneration of a ruling elite is enforced, or a single-party regime holds uncontested power, subject to severe punishment
Legal or constitutional provisions exclude non-religious views from freedom of religion or belief
It is illegal to register an explicitly Humanist, atheist, secularist or other non-religious NGO or other human rights organization, or such groups are persecuted by authorities
Prohibitive interreligious social control (including interreligious marriage bans)
It is illegal to advocate secularism or church-state separation, or such advocacy is suppressed
The non-religious are barred from holding government office
There is a religious tax or tithing which is compulsory, or which is state-administered and discriminates by precluding non-religious groups
It is illegal or unrecognised to identify as an atheist or as non-religious
Some concerns about children's right to specifically freedom of religion or belief

This condition may apply if specifically religious education, religious materials, or specific religious denominations are so tightly controlled that children are in fact over-protected from exposure to religion and are likely unable to explore or construct their own worldview in accordance with their evolving capacities. This condition helps us to classify states (perhaps with secular constitutions) which have criminalized specifically religious beliefs or practices. This condition is not applied if the restricted beliefs or practices are found to be outlawed due to their being of an extremist variety. While this condition does not directly reflect discrimination against non-religious persons or non-religious ideas, it does represent an overall threat to freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief; such restrictions could spill over to affect non-religious beliefs later; and they pose a risk of backlash against over-zealous secular authorities or even against non-religious individuals by association.

Countries: China, Congo, Democratic Republic of, Cuba, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Guinea, Guyana, Italy, Kazakhstan, Laos, Madagascar, Mali, Mexico, North Macedonia, Romania, Tajikistan, Togo, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Viet Nam, Zimbabwe

It is made difficult to register or operate an explicitly Humanist, atheist, secularist or other non-religious NGO or other human rights organization
Legend
 
Severe Discrimination
Systemic Discrimination
Mostly Satisfactory
More information about rating table

Constitution and government

The Constitution[ref]https://www.oas.org/juridico/english/mesicic3_tto_constitution.pdf[/ref] and other laws and policies protect freedom of thought, conscience and religion, as well as freedom of opinion and expression. These rights are generally respected in practice.

The government reportedly funds the Inter-Religious Organization (IRO) which brings together representatives of faith-based groups, including Christians, Hindus, Muslims and Bahai’is, but does not include representatives of the atheist or humanist community. The organization’s founding mandate is to “speak to the nation on matters of social, moral, and spiritual concern.”[ref]https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/TRINIDAD-AND-TOBAGO-2018-INTERNATIONAL-RELIGIOUS-FREEDOM-REPORT.pdf[/ref]

Leaders from five religious groups – Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Orisha, and Baha’i – are reported to deliver invocations at government-sponsored events, including the opening of parliament and the annual court term.[ref]https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/TRINIDAD-AND-TOBAGO-2018-INTERNATIONAL-RELIGIOUS-FREEDOM-REPORT.pdf[/ref]

Education and children’s rights

The government subsidizes both non-denominational public schools and religiously-affiliated public schools (for example, Catholic, Hindu, and Islamic).[ref]https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/TRINIDAD-AND-TOBAGO-2018-INTERNATIONAL-RELIGIOUS-FREEDOM-REPORT.pdf[/ref]

The government permits religious instruction in non-denominational public schools, allocating time each week when any religious organization with an adherent in the school may provide an instructor.[ref]https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/TRINIDAD-AND-TOBAGO-2018-INTERNATIONAL-RELIGIOUS-FREEDOM-REPORT.pdf[/ref] Humanist or atheist education is not an option for children from secular backgrounds, though attendance at religious instruction classes is voluntary.

In July 2020, the IRO announced a new youth program designed to give children attending non-denominational schools an opportunity to learn about spirituality and morality, among other social issues faced by young people in the country.[ref]https://www.guardian.co.tt/news/iro-to-create-programme-for-tt-youth-6.2.1153552.39f0d63036[/ref]

Family, community and society

Marriage

Under the law, marriage is defined as a contract between a man and a woman. There are four kinds of marriage recognized under the law: civil,[ref]https://rgd.legalaffairs.gov.tt/laws2/Alphabetical_List/lawspdfs/45.01.pdf; Miscellaneous Provisions (Marriage) Act 2017: http://www.ttparliament.org/legislations/a2017-08.pdf[/ref] Muslim,[ref]https://rgd.legalaffairs.gov.tt/laws2/Alphabetical_List/lawspdfs/45.02.pdf[/ref] Hindu[ref]https://rgd.legalaffairs.gov.tt/laws2/Alphabetical_List/lawspdfs/45.02.pdf[/ref] and Orisha,[ref]http://www.ttparliament.org/legislations/a1999-22.pdf[/ref] each with their own acts and legal differences.

All Christian marriages performed in a church are considered civil marriages, provided the presiding minister is a licensed Marriage Officer.[ref]https://tt.usembassy.gov/u-s-citizen-services/local-resources-of-u-s-citizens/getting-married-trinidad-tobago/#:~:text=Civil%2C%20Muslim%20and%20Orisa%20marriages,by%20a%20licensed%20Marriage%20Officer.&text=Under%20Civil%20Marriage%20law%20you,Hindu%20marriages%20is%20age%2016[/ref]

While previously, each act allowed exceptions for individuals under the legal minimum marriage age to be married – especially on religious grounds, – the Miscellaneous Provisions (Marriage) Act 2017, raised the age of consent to marriage in all cases to 18, despite the objections of the IRO.[ref]http://www.ttparliament.org/legislations/a2017-08.pdf; https://www.girlsnotbrides.org/articles/religious-defence-of-child-marriage-sparks-debate-in-trinidad-and-tobago/[/ref]

Matrimonial affairs are heard by the Family Court. However, Muslim marriages are heard by a Muslim council.[ref]https://preventforcedmarriage.org/forced-marriage-overseas-trinidad-tobago/[/ref]

The Muslim Marriage and Divorce Act is the only religious marriage act with specific provisions on divorces and annulments. Otherwise, the Matrimonial Proceedings and Property Act outlines the law regarding dissolution of a marriage.

Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights

Under the Offenses Against the Person Act – a legacy of British colonial rule[ref]https://centreforfeministforeignpolicy.org/journal/2020/3/9/the-globalisation-of-punitive-abortion-laws-the-colonial-legacy-of-the-offences-against-the-person-act-1861-ygeff[/ref] – abortion is a criminal offence punishable with up to four years imprisonment for those who procure an abortion and two years for anyone who assists in the procurement of an abortion.[ref]https://rgd.legalaffairs.gov.tt/laws2/Alphabetical_List/lawspdfs/11.08.pdf[/ref] Exemptions appear to be permitted on the basis of: to preserve mental health; to preserve physical health; or to save a woman’s life. However, access in practice remains limited.[ref]https://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/resource-pdf/FINAL_Trinidad_and_Tobago.pdf; https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/theme/policy/AbortionPoliciesAGlobalReview2002_Vol3.PDF[/ref]

LGBTI+

In June 2018, a coalition of religious groups came forward to express their concern for proposed amendments to the Equal Opportunity Act that sought to include LGBTI+ definitions of sex and gender.[ref]https://cruxnow.com/global-church/2018/06/interfaith-leaders-in-trinidad-express-unity-on-traditional-marriage/[/ref]

In April 2018, the High Court ruled (in the case of Jason Jones v. Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago) that sections of the Sexual Offenses Act[ref]Sexual Offenses Act prior to amendment in 2019: https://rgd.legalaffairs.gov.tt/laws2/Alphabetical_List/lawspdfs/11.28.pdf[/ref] that criminalized prohibited “buggery” and “serious indecency” between two men, criminalized consensual same-sex activity between adults, and were unconstitutional.[ref]https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/13/trinidad-and-tobago-sexual-offences-act-ruled-unconstitutional; https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/TRINIDAD-AND-TOBAGO-2018-INTERNATIONAL-RELIGIOUS-FREEDOM-REPORT.pdf; Sexual Offenses Act 2019, as amended: http://news.gov.tt/sites/default/files/E-Gazette/Gazette%202019/Acts/Act%20No.%2019%20of%202019.pdf[/ref]

According to Amnesty International, as of 2020, the government continued to appeal against this landmark High Court judgement, and that the government “indicated that it intended to have this case heard by the country’s highest appellate court, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the UK.”[ref]https://www.amnesty.org/en/countries/americas/trinidad-and-tobago/report-trinidad-and-tobago/[/ref]

While making amendments to the Domestic Violence Act, the government failed to include couples in same-sex relationships, anouncing that they were awaiting the outcome of the state’s appeal in the case of Jason Jones before extending rights to LGBTI+ groups.[ref]https://www.amnesty.org/en/countries/americas/trinidad-and-tobago/report-trinidad-and-tobago/[/ref]

Freedom of expression, advocacy of humanist values

Freedom of speech is constitutionally guaranteed, and generally respected.[ref]https://freedomhouse.org/country/trinidad-and-tobago/freedom-world/2020[/ref] Print and broadcast media are independent, diverse and vibrant. Trinidad and Tobago ranks 31 out of 179 countries on the 2021 World Press Freedom Index, rising five places in the past year.[ref]https://rsf.org/en/trinidad-and-tobago[/ref]

Freedom of association and assembly are also constitutionally guaranteed and respected. There is an active civil society in operation.[ref]https://freedomhouse.org/country/trinidad-and-tobago/freedom-world/2020[/ref]

‘Blasphemy’

Although not enforced in practice, the Trinidad and Tobago Criminal Offenses Act 1844, as amended, stipulates that any person who is convicted of any act or an attempt to commit “blasphemy, writing and publishing, or printing and publishing, any blasphemous libel . . . is liable to a fine and to imprisonment for two years.”[ref]http://rgd.legalaffairs.gov.tt/laws2/alphabetical_list/lawspdfs/11.01.pdf[/ref]

Additionally, the Miscellaneous Offenses Act 2000,[ref]http://www.ttparliament.org/legislations/a2000-85.pdf[/ref] added a new offence to the Summary Offences Act.[ref]https://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/en/tt/tt030en.pdf[/ref] Article 96A reads,

“Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, any person who brings into contempt or disbelief or who attacks, ridicules or vilifies another person’s religion in a manner that is likely to provoke a breach of the peace commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine of one thousand dollars.”

Effectively inserting an additional de facto blasphemy law into the national legislative framework.