IMPACS: What is pre­vent­ing due process?

The Star (St. Lucia) - - LOCAL - By Lu­cia H. Best

De­nial! De­nial! De­nial! Once again Prime Min­is­ter Dr. Kenny Anthony is as­suag­ing his con­science of

all re­spon­si­bil­ity for IMPACS. At ev­ery pub­lic meet­ing he cre­ates this op­por­tu­nity to fin­ger­point, as at the po­lit­i­cal meet­ing in

Babon­neau re­cently. The prime min­is­ter is fix­ated on mar­ket­ing to the elec­torate the gim­mick that Guy May­ers is the one

re­spon­si­ble for IMPACS, even

if this line of ar­gu­ment makes

no sense. The fact is, no mat­ter how fan­ci­ful and colour­ful the po­lit­i­cal rhetoric Labour may bring to their pub­lic meet­ings,

IMPACS will re­main an act of ar­ro­gance on the part of this ad­min­is­tra­tion and a fes­ter­ing po­lit­i­cal ul­cer which has since birthed the Medusa of this cur­rent ad­min­is­tra­tion.

But the prime min­is­ter’s clear­ance of him­self is pre­dictable enough; we all know why it seems to be his main ob­ses­sion at this time; ahead of a general elec­tion. He earnestly wishes the

whole IMPACS co­nun­drum to be dis­tanced from his party be­cause it is in­ex­orably linked to his failed record of over­all bad gover­nance, not to men­tion the at­ten­dant con­tro­versy

and macabre. Nev­er­the­less the Prime Min­is­ter is in­vited to pub­licly ex­plain some rea­son­able con­sid­er­a­tions.

The Leahy Law re­mains

firmly in place against Saint Lu­cia. Mean­time the mighty United States and Euro­pean Union “EU” are tak­ing cog­nizance of the KDA ad­min­is­tra­tion’s prom­ises

dur­ing a Na­tional Ad­dress on March 8, 2015 to take cer­tain steps to con­clu­sively deal with the IMPACS Re­port. Guess what? To date, they are clearly un­ap­peased and unim­pressed with this ad­min­is­tra­tion’s re­sponse. In De­cem­ber 2015 they (EU rep­re­sen­ta­tives) made their sen­ti­ments known via a press con­fer­ence, and did their tough-talk­ing over the is­sue which is be­com­ing slightly pro­tracted ap­par­ently, by their stan­dards.

Pray tell Mr. Prime Min­is­ter: how do police op­er­a­tions such as Op­er­a­tion

Re­store Con­fi­dence be­come one and the same crea­ture

as IMPACS? IMPACS was a crea­ture of the Ex­ec­u­tive arm and had noth­ing to do with the Police. As a mat­ter of fact Ja­maicans who never took the

police oath of Saint Lu­cia were com­mis­sioned to un­der­take this in­ves­ti­ga­tion; which placed

IMPACS com­pletely out­side the purview and scope of the lo­cal police and the modus operandi for ORC crim­i­na­land IMPACS in­ves­ti­ga­tions.are the same,If then the two ex­er­cises have mu­tu­ally cross-con­tam­i­nated each other. So then we sur­mise that the IMPACS in­ves­ti­ga­tion should also be in­ves­ti­gated as part of the prob­lem.

The prime min­is­ter is per­haps un­in­ten­tion­ally im­ply­ing that that Guy May­ers, for­mer UWP Min­is­ter for Home Af­fairs and Na­tional Se­cu­rity, de­cided to over­look the coro­ner’s find­ings of death by mis­ad­ven­ture, as it re­lates to the deaths in­volved with ORC. In­quests, by the way, are the re­course the Saint Lu­cia Con­sti­tu­tion pro­vides for such in­ci­dents. De­spite this pro­vi­sion be­ing used, did the prime min­is­ter not delve into im­ple­ment­ing his own al­ter­nate

mea­sures as in IMPACS?

If this gov­ern­ment is

not re­spon­si­ble for IMPACS, why did Dr. Kenny Anthony and his ad­min­is­tra­tion pass spe­cial leg­is­la­tion to fa­cil­i­tate

IMPACS by amend­ing the Police Com­plaints Act? As has been asked be­fore, why did the prime min­is­ter not in­vite the United

States of Amer­ica to sim­ply

re­view the coro­ner’s In­quests for it­self? Was the coro­ner’s re­port over­looked be­cause the in­quests were deemed

in­valid some­how? Truly tell the

pub­lic: was the coro­ner’s re­port

prof­fered to the US of­fi­cials through the rel­e­vant chan­nels and if it was, why wasn’t this

re­port hon­ored by the US?

It can be de­duced log­i­cally that the UWP, by dint of be­ing in op­po­si­tion, is not a ma­jor player in re­gard to the events that have

oc­curred since ORC. They were not and still are not in a po­si­tion to dic­tate how the af­ter­math of

Op­er­a­tion Re­store Con­fi­dence which took place be­tween 2010 and 2011 should be han­dled. It must be noted very in­ter­est­ingly that in 2010 there was no great out­cry against ORC or of Hu­man Right Vi­o­la­tions and ex­tra­ju­di­cial killings but there were such claims in 2011, an elec­tion

year. There­after the in­cum­bent UWP lost the elec­tions and the KDA ad­min­is­tra­tion as­sumed

of­fice in Novem­ber 2011.

Did the prime min­is­ter then not con­sider an in­de­pen­dent

in­ves­ti­ga­tion such as IMPACS to be the plau­si­ble rem­edy to the sup­posed “hue and cry” by that cer­tainthe police sec­tions force of was so­ci­ety in­ves­ti­gat­ingthat he had to it­self? ap­pease Did thosehe feel fin­ger­ing him as “al­low­ing the police to in­ves­ti­gate them­selves” by do­ing some­thing dras­tic?

Suf­fice it to say that the IMPACS is­sues are well

be­yond the realm of be­ing a

par­ti­san football. No mat­ter who on the po­lit­i­cal di­vide claims re­spon­si­bil­ity or shirks

re­spon­si­bil­ity for IMPACS it will not go away. It is here con­fronting this coun­try as a whole and re­ally should not be politi­cized be­cause such rhetoric will not cause the Leahy Law to be lifted off

Saint Lu­cia. The point is for

sev­eral months now both the EU and the USA have been de­mand­ing that IMPACS be ad­dressed “by all those re­spon­si­ble to en­sure due

process ac­cord­ing to the St. Lu­cia crim­i­nal law sys­tem” and by the look of things are grow­ing im­pa­tient. What is more rel­e­vant and ur­gent now for the prime min­is­ter to ex­plain is: What is stand­ing in the way of “due process”?

Prime Min­is­ter Kenny Anthony: Is he will­ing to dance to the tune of


Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Saint Lucia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.