Vernon Daley

The police force, perhaps unwittingly, has given the best argument against the much talked about proposal for 'preventive detention'.

Last week, the police released the names of 77 of the most wanted men in Kingston and St. Andrew alone. That's a whole lot of wanted men walking about free among us, and when we consider that these fellows are drawn from only two parishes, the figure is even more alarming. Some 36 of those men are said to have committed dangerous gun crimes since the start of the year while the remaining 41 are wanted for crimes committed last year.

But if the police can't find these dangerous men in the first place, how will a power of preventive detention help in taking them off the streets? The police can hardly detain a man if they fail to discover his whereabouts.

Number of suspects

It would be interesting to find out what number of suspects the police have credibly picked up in connection with the almost 800 murders committed since the start of this year, and the reasons for them not being able to charge those who have been released. I wouldn't be surprised if most of those, who have committed murders, have not even seen the door of a police station on account of the police not being able to find them.

When the big fish swim away, all preventive detention does is allow the police to round up the 'ticky-ticky' on the corner and, in that process, breed more resentment and mistrust between communities and the police. As a short-term strategy, preventive detention is suspect and it comes with inherent dangers, which are likely to set back the work of the very police it is proposed to help.

Never yield

The human rights groups, which have been railing against this proposal, must never yield an inch because they are on the right side of the issue. They should, however, expect to come under a great deal of pressure from sympathisers of preventive detention who will, in time, make the false suggestion that they are more concerned about criminals than law-abiding citizens.

It's a mesmeric piece of propaganda that is likely to be appealing to Jamaicans, who are justly frightened about the crime wave and what seems like an inability of the authorities to deal with the situation. In this environment, to kick against the anodyne of 'tough policing' is to invite the people's wrath.

Still, the human rights groups, and those who share their outlook, must look past the immediate unpopularity of the cause and play for history. If security is to be bought at the expense of freedom, then I doubt we might consider that a reasonable purchase.

A tax might do the trick.

Dr Kevin Harvey, Senior Medical Officer in charge of the Health Ministry's National HIV/STI Programme, last week made a fantastic suggestion about taxing prostitutes. The moralists, not surprisingly, already have their daggers drawn but, at least, he has got the nation's attention.

Secondary issue

Of course, the prostitution tax was really his secondary issue. The main thrust of the argument is the regulation of commercial sex workers, in an effort to make it easier for health care professionals to have access to this vulnerable group, engaged in a dangerous business.

Professor Peter Figueroa, Head of Epidemiology and AIDS in the ministry has been making this sensible call for many years, without the government taking real notice. Maybe now, with the suggestion of possible revenue for the treasury, we might get some movement on the issue.

Choosing not to regulate prostitution will not make it go away. It has been here forever and will be here forever more. If we can get past the moral arguments, perhaps we might even save a few lives.

Send comments to: vernon.daley@gmail.com; for other feedback,columns@gleanerjm.com.