Do the honourable thing
IT WAS alleged that something untoward transpired between a man and a woman. It was alleged that they had a verbal altercation, which escalated into a physical confrontation. It was a rather brutal fight, culminating in shoves, punches and an object being used by the man to repeatedly strike the woman about the head. The incident was captured on CCTV, but the quality was not good enough to positively identify either combatant.
Subsequently, two individuals submitted separate plaintiff reports to the police. When the police tried to further investigate the incident, both parties became uncooperative. Consequently, no charges were made against either of them and the matter came to a legal end.
However, the man involved is strongly rumoured to be a sitting Jamaica Labour Party member of parliament. This suspicion was fortified because it was reported that he had submitted a report to the police after the incident. The hierarchy of that political party has avoided questioning and, if necessary, disciplining the gentleman appropriately; citing selfincrimination (on his part) should he admit to the fracas. They consider it ultra vires to act, since no charges were brought against him.
The cacophony of public uproar and cumulative condemnations of his (alleged) actions caused him to step back for now. In the meantime, some are stridently calling for his resignation or dismissal, but the ruling party is pussyfooting around this extremely serious and sensitive matter. I believe that the intent is to allow the dust to settle until time blurs and ameliorates the situation. I also believe that inaction will injure the ruling party.
OTHER RUMOURS SURFACED
Other rumours about other top politicians abusing their spouses have surfaced (although none was ever this public), as if to argue that battering women is not new and has been done on both sides of the political divide – none of that makes it okay. Whoever physically abused the woman in the viral video has no excuse for his actions; that was not self-defence by any stretch of the imagination.
There is the law, and then there is honour. In the not-too-distant past, any hint, any suggestion, any rumour of any indiscretion would see the politician immediately offering his/her resignation to maintain the upstanding reputation of the party which he/she represents. In fact, if a family member or relative were rumoured to be associated with, or accused of serious misconduct, the politician would resign to avoid sullying the party’s name and bringing Parliament into disrepute. Obviously, no such honour and respect for the party and country are evident here.
This begs the question, why do some people get i nto representational politics? If it were solely for the good of the country and party (as it should be), any hint of misconduct (real or strongly rumoured) would elicit immediate resignation, or, at the very least, a leave of absence and the request for a fulsome investigation to clear the air.
QUESTION MOTIVES
When a politician doggedly hangs on to power, circumvents investigation, uses legalities and silence to avoid clearing the matter up, no matter the outcome, one has to question his/her motive for entering representational politics. Is he/she in it to serve the people or to serve himself/herself?
Someone within the party needs to take the individual in question aside and have a serious conversation with him. This fracas took place in the middle of several extremely disturbing incidents of violence against woman. Some have ended in murder, and seeing the battering (especially with a stool) delivered to the woman in the video makes me realise that she is very fortunate to have escaped serious injury or death.
This problem will not fade away, and since the male involved appears intent on remaining in office, the party needs to find a way to deal with it or be prepared for the inevitable backlash.
‘When a politician doggedly hangs on to power, circumvents investigation, uses legalities and silence to avoid clearing the matter up, no matter the outcome, one has to question his/her motive for entering representational politics. Is he/she in it to serve the people or to serve himself/herself?’