The politics of consensus
IAGREE with the points made in Mark Hylton’s letter ‘State of emergency must turn on sobriety, not noise’ (Letter of the Day, December 15, 2018).
Mr Hylton wrote: “Why could we not have had a sit-down at Vale Royal with the leader, as well as the minister of national security and the shadow spokesman on security, with the commissioner of police and the major general included? Out of the glare of the optics and the partisan babble, the strategies moving forward, the human-rights concerns and the necessary modifications of the current operations could be discussed, and a unified outcome communicated to the country.”
I respect Opposition Leader Dr Peter Phillips, but the way that he announced in Parliament that the People’s National Party (PNP) would not support an extension of the states of emergency (SOE) in St James, St Catherine North and Kingston was a disastrous misstep by the party, and spelt tragedy for the nation.
I assume that the PNP’s decision was well-intentioned. There are genuine grounds for concern, for example, about the length of time taken to process detainees. However, these intentions are now irrelevant, because the delivery was all about political posturing and point-scoring. There was no sign of any willingness to put the national interest first, or concern for the people whose lives will now be in danger. There was no reasoned argument, no sign of any intention to help the police do a better job of implementing the SOEs, and little concern for constitutional law.
The PNP may not have thought about the devastating impact that their decision will have on the long-suffering communities involved. Since January 18, 2018, ordinary, decent, law-abiding people living in St James have had relative peace and security. They have gradually started to recover from the trauma of living in one of the most violent neighbourhoods in the world, a virtual war zone. Before the intervention, they lived with gunfire and sleepless nights. They were trapped in their homes, unable to walk out at night. They suffered from the corrosive fear that they or their loved ones might be the next to be murdered.
For nearly a year, these good people had peace. They saw a dramatic reduction in murder and shootings. Life in St James, St Catherine and in the relevant areas of Kingston became ‘normal’, i.e., free of fear of imminent death. This is the sort of normal that most politicians, protected by their status, wealth and bodyguards, take for granted.
The PNP’s announcement sent a very clear message to the criminals, the murderers and gangs: that they will soon be able to get back to business as usual, and impose their deadly reign of terror once more.
I am sure that the PNP did not intend to give that assurance to the murderers, but that does not matter. The killers heard the message.
I accept that the PNP genuinely believed that the SOEs had been in place too long, but I felt strongly that the way they made the announcement was wrong. They should not have made a decision of such great national importance without consultation, dialogue or prior notice. Given that many lives are at stake, the least that the nation was due was a carefully worded, measured statement setting out a reasoned position on a matter of overriding national concern.
As the days passed after Dr Phillips’ announcement, some of the initial shock at the PNP’s decision subsided. Some people did understand that there was a rationale behind the Opposition’s decision to withdraw their support, and that they were not trying to hug up the criminals. And perhaps some felt that the prime minister should have done more to bring the Opposition into the decision-making process.
Political turmoil should never have happened. The Government and Opposition must work together, and be seen to work together, when it comes to national security.
DISGRACEFUL SPECTACLE
If it is genuinely impossible to arrive at a consensus regarding an extension to the SOE, because the Opposition no longer believes that their interpretation of Section 2(b) of the Emergency Powers Act applies, surely, the right course would have been to take the matter to court and allow judges to decide if the continuation of the SOE would be necessary, proportionate, and legal. What we had instead was a disgraceful spectacle, a bad-tempered argument between politically motivated attorneys putting forward incompatible interpretations of the Constitution.
In reply to a tweet in which I questioned if the Jamaica Constabulary Force (JCF) and Jamaica Defence Force had been consulted prior to the PNP’s decision to withdraw their support for SOEs, the opposition spokesperson on national security replied: Yes, we consulted with the JCF. Please note that we voted to extend ZOSO. Thus, saturation policing, cordon and curfew, checkpoints remain. They still have the power to arrest but cannot detain indefinitely.
This reply did not make it clear, however, what the outcome of the consultation actually was. The security forces may have asked the Opposition to continue to support the SOEs, or they may have agreed that they were no longer necessary. Either outcome would put a completely different light on what happened in Parliament.
Since the prime minister, through the National Security Council, received a request for a further extension of the SOEs from the security forces, I can only assume that the consultation with the security forces made it clear that they felt that they needed the SOEs.
Either way, the fact that open hostility and division between the Government and Opposition positions on the SOEs was played out in such a fractious and point-scoring manner in Parliament is a matter of great concern.
The new approach to managing the economy is a positive example of how we should approach the management of crime. We are now receiving accolades from the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and other international financial institutions for our new-found fiscal discipline, and the creation of an environment for economic growth and prosperity. We could achieve the same kind of results with crime, but we would have to achieve the same political maturity and consensus that we now bring to macroeconomic management.
Crime should never again be a matter of politics.
DETAINEES, FORENSICS, RIGHTS
I share the concerns expressed by the public defender concerning human rights abuses and the conditions that the detainees were held under the SOE. I also believe that since her review, the JCF has done much to improve the conditions and the administration of those detained. However, to ensure that the improvements are not just cosmetic, we need a system whereby justices of the peace are empowered to make random inspections of all facilities where detainees are held and immediately report any breaches in human rights.
We must also make an effort to offer education, social assistance and skills training to detainees while they are in custody. The objective is to try to turn them into decent citizens while we still have the chance.
My more immediate concern is that a DNA swab, fingerprints and a digital photograph are taken from every detainee before release (this can be done under Section 30(4) of the Emergency Powers Regulations 2018). This is because the forensic laboratory holds thousands of unidentified DNA samples, and the JCF have fingerprints left on recovered firearms and at crime scenes. If biodata are taken from all detainees, there will be a unique investigative opportunity to cross-reference these samples with all currently unidentified samples from crime scenes. Many crimes could then be cleared up.
Whatever your political persuasion, we can all agree that the ultimate human right is the right to life. The fact that the SOEs saved hundreds of lives in 2018, and allowed many people to live a relatively normal life, was a huge step forward for Jamaica. Nobody wants the SOEs to continue indefinitely, but they displaced criminals, disrupted gangs, and stopped organised crime from recruiting.
As Professor Anthony Clayton has said on a number of occasions, we must reach out to the neglected communities, bring them back into society, and give their residents a chance of a decent, law-abiding life.