Peter Espeut | Devaluing National Honours

There should be a difference between national honours and long-service awards; the former should be related to remarkable personal achievement towards the public good, while the latter is related to longevity, perseverance, endurance and stability.

Both are important, but are different. Jamaica has the former, but not the latter. Sadly, in some cases, national awards have been used to reward long (and faithful) – if unremarkable – service. This inevitably devalues our suite of national honours.

The delinking of Jamaica’s system of national honours from achievement began in 1973 when the ‘Order of the Nation’ (ON) was created. At first, only governors general of Jamaica – all appointed on the recommendation of the prime minister – may receive the ON – Jamaica’s second highest national honour. I suppose the appointment was their achievement. Later (in 2002) all prime ministers – good or bad, effective or ineffective – became automatically entitled to receive the ON and to be styled ‘The Most Honourable’. Again, I suppose the achievement was to have arrived at the lofty political office of prime minister.

In my view, these high national “honours” are meaningless, as they are ex officio and automatic, and smack of the accolades royalty award themselves. They are political spoils created by politicians to reward their own, and are inaccessible to high-achieving Jamaicans. Their very existence devalues the whole system of national honours.

DITCHES CONCEPT OF ROYALTY

I hope that when Jamaica ditches the concept of ‘royalty’, these automatic ‘honours’ will end up in the same place.

Jamaica’s third highest national honour is not even accessible to high-achieving Jamaicans! The (speaky-spokey) ‘Order of Excellence’ (OE) was created in 2003 as a way our local politicians can honour foreign politicians. It is intended to be bestowed upon foreign heads of state or government, and so far has been awarded to Thabo Mbeki of South Africa (in 2003), King Juan Carlos I of Spain (in 2009), Jakaya Kikwete of Tanzania (in 2009), and Danilo Medina of the Dominican Republic (in 2017).

Surely an honorary ‘Order of Jamaica’ is a high enough accolade to bestow on a foreign head of state? Why create a special high Jamaican honour for foreign politicians?

(Other than the rarely bestowed ‘Order of National Hero’), the highest national honour open to ordinary Jamaicans is the tritely named ‘Order of Merit’ (OM). Surely the honour bearing the name of the nation (the ‘Order of Jamaica’) should be of higher rank? Merit badges are awarded to primary school children. Is there a suggestion that Jamaica’s fourth highest honour is the only one merited?

Only about 30 Jamaicans have ever received an OM, and only one was a politician (Michael Manley); Fidel Castro was also given an OM before the OE was created. The list of OM awardees is a most honourable one, containing scientists, academics, athletes, and cultural icons – all high achievers. I congratulate the Awards Committee for (mostly) keeping politicians and their donors out of the OM.

The same cannot be said for the list of recipients of the ‘Order of Jamaica’.

Looking at the list of the more than 200 recipients of the OJ over the years, 16 of them are foreign heads of state; that is as it should be. Fourteen are senior judges; nine are diplomats, eight are senior civil servants and fifteen are government bureaucrats. The categories of culture and sports have fourteen each, while ten religious figures received OJs. By far the largest categories are politicians (27) and businessmen (33), who we can call ‘the donors’.

Only one educator at the high school level makes the list (Wesley Powell), as well as nine medical practitioners. Maybe my list is incomplete.

Poorly represented or absent from the OJ Honours Lists are journalists (four), human rights advocates (three) and environmentalists (none).

The national heroes we have named since Independence challenged the British Colonial governments of their day; some were arrested, and some lost their lives in the struggle. Very few of those who have received national honours since Independence were guilty of challenging incumbent PNP or JLP governments. Governments since Independence have been satisfied to honour mostly their members and supporters.

Bad as that is, it would be unseemly for persons who actually sit on the honours committee to approve national honours for themselves! Has this ever happened?

BASKET OF SCARCE BENEFITS

Are national honours part of the basket of scarce benefits and political spoils which political partisans share among themselves? Or am I being unfair?

It seems to me that we need one set of honours which politicians may share among themselves and their supporters, and another set awarded to outstanding high-achieving Jamaicans, especially those who challenge the way the government and political parties operate. What do you think?

Then maybe those patriotic Jamaicans behind Citizen Action for Free and Fair Elections (CAFFE), Jamaicans for Justice (JFJ), the Jamaica Environment Trust (JET), and like organisations will get the recognition they deserve for their important national service. This won’t happen in my lifetime.

Let me be clear that those of us that do this kind of work expect no honours from those against whom we struggle. What we expect is for those who control political power to fight tooth and nail to avoid transparency; to avoid open declarations of assets by public servants; to retain the various ‘gag clauses’; to maintain the Official Secrets Act, and to block access under the ‘Freedom from Information Act’, as I call it.

I expect government to pass laws to favour itself: to capture private land requires adverse possession for twelve years, but to capture crown lands requires undisturbed occupation for sixty years. The government has promised to bring all other government lands under the crown land regime, but private land will remain the same. This is clear conflict of interest.

I expect government to pass laws allowing the pensions of prime ministers to automatically increase to match inflation, while the pensions of other government workers depreciate as inflation advances. This is clear conflict of interest.

I expect politicians to avoid making the immoral things they do (like nepotism, cronyism, conflicts of interest, breaches of procurement guidelines) into criminal offences. This is clear conflict of interest.

And to reward failed government ministers with high national honours. That is the nature of the beast!

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