Desmond McKenzie owes Jamaica an apology

Members of the public, including human rights advocates, have been heavily criticised in cases where they have disagreed with the Government's actions regarding crime. Recently, Desmond Mckenzie, the local government minister and a senior member of the Cabinet,  remarked: “Every time the Government speaks about tackling crime using the measures (SOEs) that are legally there, that our security forces asked us to implement, they jump up like they are newborn virgins, untouched virgins, talking about human rights." This remark was not the first attack on the group.

Attack on rights groups is wrong

15 Dec 2022

THERE IS a growing tendency among Jamaican government officials to paint human-rights advocates as fifth columnists, working on behalf of criminals and against law-abiding citizens.

They intend the ploy to be a counter to criticisms of the administration’s use of states of emergency (SOES) as its main crime-fighting tool, and to blunt complaints against the police – including that they kill too many people. The tactic is cynical and dangerous. It potentially sets up the heads of human-rights groups for the intemperate actions of people who may be persuaded, and influenced, by the absurdity.

But more importantly, it represents a profoundly bad approach to governance and is undermining of the processes that make liberal democracies what they are: societies where people’s rights are respected and guaranteed, and freedoms enjoyed by individuals thrive.

The latest iteration of the anti-human-rights posture was last week’s caterwaul in Westmoreland by Desmond Mckenzie, the local government minister and senior member of Prime Minister Andrew Holness’ Cabinet.

“Every time the Government speaks about tackling crime using the measures (SOES) that are legally there, that our security forces asked us to implement, they jump up like they are newborn virgins, untouched virgins, talking about human rights,”mr Mckenzie said.“i want to ask some of these human rights, so-called, organisations, who, as far as I am concerned, have to keep themselves alive because they’re getting international funding ... What about the rights of communities where persons can’t come out of their houses because they are under siege by criminals?”

It is not the first time that Mr Mckenzie has made remarks in this vein – or the second. In October, he complained about the constant talk about “people’s constitutional rights” every time the Government put a “foot forward” against crime. Earlier this month, he pummelled human-rights groups for purportedly failing to speak out against indiscipline in the society, or harm against members of the security forces. And more.

ROUTINE ANTI-CRIME TOOL

States of emergency have emerged as an important, and sensitive, policy in Jamaica and the Government. SOES give the security forces wide powers to detain people for long periods without having to prefer charges.

Since 2018, they have been extensively deployed – initially with the Opposition’s grudging support – to deal with surges in the country’s murder rate of around 1,400 civilian homicides annually.

The policy is strongly supported by the private sector, but is no longer endorsed by the Opposition and humanrights advocates, who argued that the device was not intended as a routine anti-crime tool. Further, two court rulings, in cases brought by people who were detained for long periods under states of emergency, went against the Government, largely because judges found the regulations that governed them were flawed. In one ruling, a judge argued that accompanying regulations gave the security minister powers that encroached on the authority of the court, in breach of the separation of powers.

It might otherwise have been assumed that Mr Mckenzie was on a private frolic, or that Horace Chang, the national security minister, was cosying up to the police, to keep them on side in the face of criticism of their competence and behaviour.

However, though harsher, Mr Mckenzie’s argument is similar to past utterances by Prime Minister Holness about the matter.

In a speech in June defending his administration’s use of emergency powers to respond to Jamaica’s crime problem, Mr Holness declared his credentials as a democrat and said that Jamaica’s liberal democracy was safe under his watch. But he warned that “disorder will lead to anarchy”.

“So, those who believe that their very eloquent pronouncements about rights are finding favour with the masses of the people, what they are doing is increasingly alienating the people from the system of justice and law enforcement,” Mr Holness said.“I do not have the luxury to be dithering on these matters anymore. We have to act on it. We have to act to protect the innocent, lawabiding citizens.”

FEARMONGERING

This newspaper does not believe that fighting crime and advocating for people’s rights are mutually exclusive. The best democracies are those where, even in the most difficult circumstances, the rights of the individual are sacrosanct and robustly advocated for. Which is what human-rights organisations do.

It is an insult not only to human-rights advocates, but to Jamaica – and to its ideals as a liberal democracy – that Mr Mckenzie would almost imply that rights advocates are close to being mercenaries and traitorous in their activities.

Noting that rights groups were funded largely by foreign donors, he said: “A lot of them have to get them salaries every month end, and if they don’t talk in the way that they do, people will say that them not doing the work.”

It is a short hop from attacking human-rights advocates to attacking other civil society accountability groups. Some people may fall for Mr Mckenzie’s fearmongering insult. But acquiescence opens the way to impunity, which Jamaicans must not allow.

In fact, the prime minister should insist that Mr Mckenzie apologises, and himself desist from any similar rhetoric.

For feedback: contact the Editorial Department at onlinefeedback@gleanerjm.com.