EDITORIAL - Apply fit-and-proper test to candidates

The people who will vie for parliamentary seats in the December 29 general election must, by law, barring a major disaster or upheaval, be nominated today.

Civil society, and the public, more broadly, no longer have an opportunity to influence who the parties select to represent them at the polls. Indeed, any such option was effectively closed a week ago when the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP), which is seeking re-election to government, and the People's National Party (PNP) formally unveiled their slates of candidates.

These lists include many young, obviously bright and, in some cases, experienced people of talent, with proven records of performance. It is perhaps to be observed, too, that there is, which some may claim is for the better, no preponderance of lawyers.

Integrity test

But while we recognise, and welcome, the quality of many of the candidates - which may have contributed to a lessening of shrillness from the platforms - this newspaper is not sanguine that either party has been sufficiently vigilant or robust enough in its application of tests of integrity on those it has chosen as representatives. Indeed, several leaders of civil society have expressed similar concerns, including the political ombudsman, Bishop Herro Blair, who has pointed to candidates who face charges for criminal offences, or have other dark clouds hanging over them.

We are especially disappointed that this is the case with the PNP, given its early establishment of an integrity commission of people of highly respected reputations and moral standing to vet its candidates. Given the lack of transparency in the operation of that commission, we do not know whether its work was unfettered.

What we are clear on, though, is that judgement of the appropriateness of the candidates has now passed from the parties and their various committees to the people who will vote on election day. There are 1.3 million people on the register of voters.

Making the right decision

In that regard, we commend to the electorate the advice of The Gleaner Council, a group of eminent Jamaicans, chaired by business leader Mr Douglas Orane, when selecting their parliamentary representatives. Apply the same hurdle that your local bank manager would have to scale before the regulators allow him, or her, to assume the job.

You should, for instance, be satisfied that the person for whom you are being asked to vote has no links with organised crime, or that there are no signals that this person has access to state resources that might have been channelled to criminal networks.

Voters should seriously question whether the person's lifestyle matches his known or estimated income, and whether the kind of relationships maintained by a candidate invites disquiet and questions of links with organised crime. What are the signals from other countries with far greater intelligence resources than Jamaica?

If, in these circumstances, your disquiet persists, we suggest that you not vote for that candidate. This, in some cases, will be counter to an individual's historical party allegiance.

However, there is something far greater at stake: Jamaica's democracy. Jamaica is already perceived as a highly corrupt country, and there have been recent signs of how crime bosses can conceivably infiltrate and acquire influence in government. Unchecked, this is a route to a failure of the State.