The Jamaican Government is facing many issues that are of the magnitude of international controversies, having consequences for the reputation of the state. There is the extradition matter of Christopher Coke between the United States and the Government of Jamaica (GOJ), the bribery/corruption allegations between the UK and a company whose activities implicate Joseph Hibbert, Member of Parliament on the Government's side, and the agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) that will test the integrity of the Government's ability to present a credible supplementary Budget and medium-term economic plan to an institution whose board is made up of leading western governments with whom we do the bulk of our economic business.

All states are expected to be law-abiding members of the international system, respecting the sovereignty and independence of other states, the human rights of all people, peace and peaceful settlements, and generally to respect international law and treaties and international morality. Jamaica has always been recognised as a law-abiding member of the international community. We have much to be proud of. We don't fight international wars, commit genocide or practise slavery, invade or colonise other countries, sell arms, corrupt other governments, pollute the global environment or destabilise the international financial and trading system.

But we do contribute to international illegality and immorality because of our role in human and drug trafficking and the trade in small weapons that go with it. Our more misguided people violate the immigration procedures of other countries and the laws of those countries, including their criminal laws. This does harm to our reputation as a people and a country. International reputation is an intangible, but very important, yet under-appreciated asset for goodwill, friendship and special relations with other countries.

The rogue state

The opposite of the law-abiding state is the rogue state. The most notorious rogue and pariah state of our time was the South African apartheid state. Powerful countries can still treat a state not so roundly condemned internationally as a 'state of concern'. Such a state can be blacklisted, placed on 'watch lists', and worse, sanctioned. Any of these will affect freedom of travel and trade, and benefits of aid, investments and the trustworthy reputation a government needs to govern.

Jamaica is in a very vulnerable situation at this time because of the potential to lose integrity if it does not act decisively on the side of law and morality.

How well we cooperate with the United States on extradition, especially regarding those whom the United States might believe are among the most dangerous criminals in the world, is a test of our law-abiding character.

The Americans are well aware of the relationship between Christopher Coke and the West Kingston constituency, for which Bruce Golding is member of Parliament and also prime minister. They know the slim majority that the Government has and the implications of this constituency for Mr Golding's continuing membership of Parliament. They know that the attorney general, whose responsibility it is to sign the extradition order on behalf of the Government, is a member of Mr Golding's Cabinet. They know that the lawyer for Coke, Tom Tavares-Finson, is a member of Golding's party and an appointee of his side of the senate. There must be a conflict of political interest in all of this and the American authorities must wonder where the line between the person they seek to extradite and the Government which needs to sign that extradition agreement is drawn.

International trust

There is also the allegation that a now Member of Parliament on the Government's side accepted a bribe of 100,000 British pounds from agents of a UK company, Mabey and Johnson. Prosecutors claimed that the company bribed the MP, Joseph Hibbert, who has protested his innocence and his lawyer, who is also a Member of Parliament on the government's side, remains steadfast that his client is innocent of the bribery allegations. Documents from the UK quote the company as stating that it had sought to influence decision-makers in public contracts in Jamaica and Ghana between 1993 and 2001.

The question of Hibbert's guilt or innocence aside, there is the politics of the matter to consider, as with the Coke issue. Where is the line drawn between the Government, its two MPs and the Government's inte-rest in maintaining its razor-thin majority?

Government would have a political interest in proving the innocence of its MP. But it would be incumbent on the Government to cooperate with the British investigators and the British court to the most open and honest extent possible in order to ensure that the state's integrity is beyond question.

Jamaica is in a delicate negotiating situation with the IMF. A loan agreement with the IMF is imminent. But integrity is important if Government is to maintain the credibility and trust any government should want in negotiating with a powerful international organisation. IMF directors are not necessarily ignorant of the broader background issues of local politics and how those issues might influence a Government's credibility on economic management.

The Government needs the confidence of the IMF to attract investments so that the economy can grow and repay loans. It needs the trust of foreign governments behind the IMF because the managing director of the IMF must by law be a European and have the confidence of the main funding governments. This includes the United States and the UK. In the real world, politics is not far removed from economics. Both meet where power and wealth matter most to those who have the most power and wealth.

Sanctions

But even if the IMF acts independently of its powerful governing members, those governments can exercise their power separately. Bad tourism advisories would be devastating. 'Rogue states' are also dealt with through asset seizures, travel bans, blacklisting, withholding of aid, and trade sanctions, and these could be applied to governments, firms or individuals.

Targeted sanctions can focus on individual leaders themselves to hold them accountable for objectionable behaviour. Members of a government holding policy level positions could lose their US citizenship if that government believes they are somehow complicit in acts against US interests, especially acts that can fall under the US' definition of terrorism.

If sanctions are even targeted and do not apply generally to all of us as Jamaicans, they would still hurt us badly because we depend so much on the US for virtually everything. Our image would suffer and so would our attractiveness as a tourism and investment destination. We went through this in the 1970s when hysterical Americans and Jamaicans thought we were going communist. Americans are not after communists anymore. They are after criminals and terrorists now. There is also new pressure in Britain to punish firms that corrupt foreign governments.

The PNP has now established an integrity commission for party matters. It should quickly develop rules to guide the party's action for these kinds of cases. Neither party should waste our international integrity to preserve their local margin of power that is only temporary, anyway.

Robert Buddan lectures in the Department of Government, UWI, Mona. Email: Robert.Buddan@uwimona.edu.jm or columns@gleanerjm.com