Boyne
Ian Boyne, Contributor
HOW MANY more babies are to be shot in their heads; how many children in the inner city are to have their birthday parties pierced by bullets; how many more mothers and grandmothers must make their daily ritual of casting themselves on the ground in weeping and wailing before this country unites against criminals?
In the midst of yet another crime wave and terror unleashed on the country, with daily murders increasing in both numbers and savagery, we have the asinine, mindless statement from JLP Spokesman on Justice, Delroy Chuck, warning of the horrors of having soldiers on the streets! This is a man who studied at Oxford University, the most reputable university in Europe, and yet with the country held hostage by criminals, we are treated with some purist notion of the role of the army. If our intellectuals are not able to help us clarify complex issues and to wade through difficult options, then what's the value of higher education, except for pragmatically preparing us to make a living-oops! We are talking about death here.
The country is not united against the terror. The sharp disagreement between people like Delroy Chuck, others in the human rights lobby, and myself, strike at the heart of the reasons we are not united. The human rights lobby and I are unquestionably united in wanting to see criminals put away. I don't accept the view that the human rights lobbyists are really supporting criminals intentionally. They are good, decent, public-spirited people who are genuinely concerned about justice and opposed to the suppression of people's legitimate rights. We have to desist from this dialogue of the deaf between those of us who support 'hard policing' and the human rights activists. (I regard myself as a human rights advocate because I am concerned about the rights of the majority of us who are under the gun).
It's time we understand our respective positions better; stop misrepresenting it and seriously address our respective concerns. Years ago Carl Stone, one of the most brilliant intellectuals this country has ever produced, courageously put on the table the view that the country faced a level of hard-core terrorism and dog-heart, cold-bloodied murderers that conventional methods were not adequate to deal with. This scandalised 'decent, human rights-respecting, civilised people.' Our plight has worsened since the time Stone wrote that, but today it is still taboo to discuss seriously in polite society whether conventional rights philosophy holds when a society is dealing with people termed "animals" by Mark Wignall in a poignant, angry and depressing article on Thursday in his Observer column "Declare War on the Gun Now".
I cannot remember the number of times I have heard special broadcasts by successive prime ministers and ministers of National Security announcing some new measures, special units, special task forces, special 'drives' to deal with this 'scourge of crime,' 'this madness,' etc., etc. For a short while, we will all be sufficiently outraged; there might be some respite but then we go back to business as usual, the criminal killings and the pleadings from the human rights lobby about 'excessive force.'
The media have now become the greatest lobbyists for 'human rights.' And politicians are always afraid of media power and the influence it can have on their own stocks. My word to the Government is that at the beginning of your fourth term, if you botch this opportunity to make a serious dent on crime for fear of media pressure and unpopularity from talk-show hosts, you will never get another opportunity to do so. This is a time which calls for courageous leadership and no playing to the gallery.
Says Wignall: "We have to declare war on the gun 24 hours a day. We have to act in our communities, among our peer groups. We have to bring pressure to bear on the politicians such as they have never seen in their lives. And this time around, we do not want words. Action is what we are demanding."
But what kind of action? Gospel meetings and preaching in the inner cities? Peace walks? The inner cities have more churches than what John read 'bout. There have been many peace marches and Peace Management Initiative 'reasonings' and interventions. The guns are still safely in the hands of the terrorists who don't mind those initiatives at all. Oh, we have to deal with the 'fundamental issues,' you say. We can't just have a 'knee-jerk reaction;' we can't just react viscerally, acting out our own animal instincts for blood and vengeance.
The 'fundamental issues' concern jobs, economic growth, bringing greater investments; improving parenting skills, values and attitudes, breaking the link between politics and the guns, teaching people about Marcus Garvey, their strong cultural heritage etc., etc. I agree with all of that, but as Lord Keynes said, "In the long run, we are all dead!" We need some short-term solutions and, believe me, we are not going to change values and attitudes overnight. 'Parents Month' will do no magic in November; the 50,000 Highway 2000 jobs promised by the Prime Minister in the election campaign will not be here in the short-term and investors (and tourists), are not falling over themselves to "make it Jamaica."
Yes, we need better intelligence-gathering facilities; we need overseas crime-fighting assistance; we need better relationships with the communities so that we can get the information to legally put away the terrorists; we might even need more good cops passing out Bibles and Sunday school material and T-shirts. I agree with all of that. But what about today, tonight? What about the thousands of decent, law-abiding, church-going citizens whose human rights are trampled minutely by criminals who rape, rob, terrorise and mentally enslave them, leaving many nervous wrecks? What about their human rights? How can we from uptown call upon the state to make them feel more secure in their hovels at night? How can we protect the 15-year old 'Kluedine' whose indescribably heinous torture and murder Wignall so movingly described in his Thursday column?
We need more people in the media who have the guts to stand up against criminals; people who publicly send them a message - no doubt Wignall is risking his own life - rather than attacking the security forces and continually regaling us with their alleged abuses rather than the daily, atrocious abuses of criminals and terrorists. I am forced to quote Wignall again: "The teacher, the lawyer, the policeman, the engineer, the architect, the accountant, the journalist, the civil servant, the bartender, the waitress, the cook, the service station attendant, the judge, the hairdresser, the husband and the wife all have a job to do in declaring war on this pestilence which has descended on us. It cannot be a declaration of words only; it has to grip the heart and consume every movement." Wignall is the most street-smart columnist writing in this country. Those whom he rightly dismisses as "PC (personal computer) commentators" can pontificate from the safety of their uptown apartments and mansions with all their sophisticated security gadgetry.Spend a day in the bars of the inner city or on its corners like Wignall and you will smell the coffee.
The politicians we can understand, because some have a vested interest in supporting criminals. When men wanted by the police are seen parading with Members of Parliament, then how can they be expected to be serious about containing criminality? None of the two parties is exempt from criticism.The link between politics and criminality is well-established - and it continues. This is why I cannot condemn the many Jamaicans who refrained from voting for any of our two main parties in the last elections. They have voted by their non-participation, so I hope the politicians get the message.The human rights lobbyists are right about the following: We cannot over-react and merely use our emotions rather than our heads in dealing with the terrorists.
We will end up as decent law-abiding people just dividing ourselves more, while the criminals are uniting across parties and communities to terrorise us. Hard policing and brutality (they are not necessarily the same) have been used and have not by themselves worked. We must be careful, too, that we do not violate the rights of innocent people who live in their communities targeted for special police/military attention and further alienate citizens on whom we will have to depend to fight crime. We must respect life - class, colour and status should not matter.The concern for the protection of human rights is proper and legitimate. I just need to hear the human rights lobbyists say more about what should be done today, tonight to deal with hardened terrorists. Some don't even want curfews. They don't want anyone to be picked up on suspicion. They don't want to see soldiers on the streets for tourists and overseas investors will feel this is a military state. They don't want people's dancehall sessions to be interrupted for gun searches, even though this is a sure place to catch the most hardened terrorists who love their deejay music which big them up.
I hear all the arguments about medium-term strategies. But there are thousands of our fellow citizens in the inner cities living under unimaginable terror and they need help today, tonight. They can't wait for more police cars, more this, more that. They want action now, not platitudes and philosophical musings.I say to Peter Phillips, bring out the army now, take your licks in the media, encourage Reneto Adams in his work while you work on all the laudable medium and long-term strategies recommended by the human rights lobby, the church and the all-powerful media commentators.
The country elected you, not them. This could be your final opportunity to save the Jamaican state itself.
