EDITORIAL - Listening to Justice Batts

The more profound point of Justice David Batts' judgment on how the police can, under the Road Traffic Act, stop and search vehicles has been largely missed, if not ignored, including by the constabulary, in the debate that has followed the ruling.

The essence of the police's response is that, Justice Batts notwithstanding, they will continue to operate as they have been doing. For not only has the stop-and-search method worked, they claim, they rely not only on the Road Traffic Act for their authority. Several others bits of legislation give them the same powers.

The approach implies ignorance by the constabulary's leadership of the continued gulf between the police and the majority of the citizens and the cause for that chasm.

Baldly put, the majority of Jamaicans do not trust the police. Not only are the police perceived to be corrupt but that they systematically, and systemically, abuse the rights of people, in particular those who are poor.

The latter point echoes loudly in Justice Batts' ruling. He is concerned with what, in other jurisdictions, is sometimes called profiling.

The case on which the judge ruled involved taxi driver Gary Hemans, who was driving with family members, in 2007, when he was stopped by police. Mr Hemans complained about their aggressiveness and was subsequently arrested, beaten and otherwise humiliated. His prosecution was abandoned. But Mr Hemans took civil action and won $2.8 million in compensation.

Erroneous Interpretation

A critical observation by Justice Batts was what he feels was an erroneous interpretation of Section 58 of the Road Traffic Act that, on the face of it, obligates a driver to "obey all directions, whether verbal or by signal, given by a constable in the execution of his duty".

The judge insists that the authority does not translate to a stop and search of vehicles by the police in the absence of "reasonable suspicion that a crime has been or is about to be committed".

Further, Jamaicans are constitutionally allowed freedom of movement, and according to Justice Batts, "it is not a lawful reason to stop and search a car based on the fact that cars with similar features are often stolen or used in the commission of crime".

Added the judge: "That would really be no different than saying that an individual walking on the road bears similar features to the majority of persons convicted of crime ... [such as] 'he is of dark complexion and wearing shorts below the waist'."

And that, we believe, is the nub of the message, intended or otherwise, sent by Justice Batts: the dangers of profiling of classes of people as crime suspects, and the social assumptions made of them, whether under the Road Traffic Act or other laws.

Jamaica suffers from high rates of violent crime. The police say that the several stop-and-search laws afford them the leverage to attack these crimes. Maybe! Except that there is no empirical evidence to support this position,

Further, such laws tend to reinforce a policing culture that values muscle over investigative skills and, more important, individuals' rights and freedoms upon which our democracy rests.

Policing in the context of Justice Batts' ruling starts with respect for ALL, irrespective of social status, who the constabulary is sworn to serve and protect.

The opinions on this page, except for the above, do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner. To respond to a Gleaner editorial, email us: editor@gleanerjm.com or fax: 922-6223. Responses should be no longer than 400 words. Not all responses will be published.