Why are the gangs thriving?
THE EXTENT of Jamaica’s crime predicament can be partly measured by revelations from the Supreme Court where 33 alleged members of a breakaway faction of the Clansman Gang are being tried on charges ranging from murder to extortion, arson and illegal possession of guns and ammunition.
As the trial of the alleged gang members progresses, there is every indication that this was no rag-tag band. Instead, the evidence alleges that this is an organisation with a leader, a hierarchy and foot soldiers who were engaged in a war with members of the St Catherine community, from where they staged their operations.
Observers are able to grasp the extent to which alleged gang members have access to weapons, often fraternise with influencers, including the police, and how they enjoy the embrace of community members and the tacit assistance of family members. Gangs, it appears, use violence to control communities and boost their money-making opportunities, which, in turn, allow them to flourish and escape being apprehended.
AN ESTIMATED 260 ACTIVE GANGS
When one considers that there are an estimated 260 active gangs operating mainly in Kingston, St Catherine and St James, one begins to understand why Jamaica has had stubbornly high rates of crime. One can see how the country could be overrun by criminals who earn handsome profits from their violent activities. It begs the question: How are we ever going to solve the crime problem which has been threatening to overwhelm us for nearly a decade?
From all indications, the police have a lot of information on gangs, they know their names, they know the members, their aliases, where they operate from, their growth and migration, their contacts and their criminal activities. Now, all the police need to do, one would think, is to shut them down and bring the criminals before the court.
Minister of National Security Dr Horace Chang will probably point to the current trial as the key to “effectively disrupt and dismantle gangs”. Of course, politicians can be expected to interpret the laws they enact in a particular way.
SLOW PROCESS
This case was brought under the anti-gang legislation. The prosecution is relying on some 40 witnesses, as well as digital forensics, ballistics and biological evidence, to prove its case of arson, murder, conspiracy to murder and possession of firearms and ammunition. Such an investigation would have taken years. Admittedly, it is a slow process to get the necessary cooperation and put together the physical evidence to secure a conviction.
One gets the impression that, when it comes to national security, only one strategy can be pursued at a time. For example, if Zones of Special Operation are introduced, we have to sit back and allow them to work their magic.
There seems to be no urgency to tackle the crime problem on all fronts. Gangsters buy motor vehicles, they purchase homes, they participate in commercial activities using the proceeds of their ill-gotten gains. We submit that, in this ongoing war, street-level enforcement has to be combined with sophisticated techniques such as monitoring commercial activities and developing financial analyses. There is already existing legislation to punish and confiscate the proceeds of crime. With more than 260 active gangs, prosecution has been exceedingly slow. And yes, we clearly understand that asset forfeiture measures have to be thoroughly investigated.
The ultimate goal must be to use intelligence to identify, apprehend and prosecute gangsters, but how about creating programmes and activities that will dent their recruitment efforts and deter unattached youth from joining their criminal networks?
When will we find the correct strategy to dent criminal activity? This question runs like a thread in most public debates and it has been repeated over and over. When?