THE SLOW return to normality in Downtown Kingston is an indication of how the authority of the State has been eroded. Up to yesterday roadblocks were still in place at key intersections, posing serious traffic hazards. For example, motorists using the one-way sections of North Street have been forced to go the wrong way.
While we applaud the restraint in not using brute force to impose the relocation of vendors, there is still a responsibility to restore civic order after the shows of defiance. Especially so as the so-called peace talks in the wake of gun violence are supposed to be under way.
We have alluded before to the involvement of area leaders in the relocation exercise. In the initial phases the changes appeared to be proceeding smoothly for the very reason that key area leaders were in charge rather than the municipal authorities.
Monday's show of defiance by the vendors, which effectively locked down the business sector, suggests that some sort of power play had gone awry at the level of area leadership. Hence the outbreak of internecine conflict between the PNP garrison communities of Matthews Lane and Tel Aviv.
Thus even though stores and other business places reopened on Tuesday, there was little trading by the vendors even though they congregated along the streets they should have abandoned as selling points.
We can see no reason why the roadblocks should remain in place while peace talks are pursued, as if in deference to the contending parties which erected them in the first place.
Street vendors, by definition, must be subject to regulation if they occupy public thoroughfares not normally designed for such activity. That is what their relocation to designated areas is all about.
In this exercise political area leadership should not be allowed to usurp what is a municipal responsibility. When sectional violence impacts on this situation law and order - on the streets and elsewhere has to be restored and maintained as a responsibility of the State.
The opinions on this page, except for the above, do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner.
