Peter Espeut | Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty

From the point of view of politicians, one of the difficulties with arresting senior public servants for corruption is that they probably know a lot about malfeasance among their colleagues and superiors. In an effort to reduce their own sentences, those caught might be induced to tell what they know about the corrupt acts of others. A newbie politician found with his hands in the till might well have been schooled by his seniors or learned by imitation or osmosis. He or she would have juicy stories to tell.

It is for this reason that there will have been little interest in, or incentive offered by, sitting politicians for law-enforcement investigators to bring senior persons to book for plundering the public purse, or any other corrupt act, including influence peddling, graft, or the award of contracts or waivers to campaign donors. Linkages between some politicians and elements in the police force have long been known.

Nor will the calls for corruption prosecution from a complicit private sector be loud or convincing because they are the ones doing the bribing to get the contracts or waivers and buying influence through campaign contributions.

The connection between political donations given and favours granted might easily be exposed if all such financial payments are openly disclosed. Those who benefit – politicians and private sector – do not seem interested in this kind of transparency. And so the corruption continues.

Illicit enrichment could be easy to detect if the declaration of assets by high public officials required by law are made in the full daylight of public scrutiny. In small societies like Jamaica, it is difficult to conceal ownership of lands, houses, and other assets, and failure to declare some of them would soon be exposed. But neither major political party has been brave enough to propose public disclosure for fear of a revolt from the rank and file of membership with their noses in the trough. And so the corruption continues.

LACKLUSTRE INVESTIGATORS

One of the reasons Jamaica has such a high murder rate and incidence of police killings is that so few murderers are caught and even fewer found guilty in a court of law. Police killings – no matter how egregious – are treated differently by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP). Over the years, police investigators have shown little zeal in investigating their fellows, leading to the formation of a special agency to do so, and that agency is facing powerful pushback from the police and their political allies.

Despite hundreds of allegations and scandals over the decades since Independence, only one politician has been arrested for, charged with, and convicted of, corruption. Nevertheless, I was quite surprised at Wednesday’s arrest of Ruel Reid, his wife and daughter, and two associates. It flies in the face of history. Many have rushed to rejoice, but the cynics among us – not least of all me – doubt that anything will come of it. Too many people have attended Cabinet meetings and know too much.

But let me draw your attention to a few interesting facts: (1) The prime minister was off the island at the time of the arrest. (2) The Office of the DPP was not involved in ruling on the actual arrests. (3) The arrests were executed by two anti-corruption agencies sort of independent from the Jamaica Constabulary Force and the Ministry of National Security, i.e., the Major Organised Crime and Anti-Corruption Agency and the Financial Investigations Division of the Ministry of Finance.

Already, one Cabinet minister has expressed his disappointment in the happenings, and I am willing to bet that others will soon chime in.

The public must be vigilant to ensure that the process ahead is clean and fair. Sometimes, cynics can be realists.

Peter Espeut is a sociologist and development scientist. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.