EDITORIAL - Ms Hanna went too far

Lisa Hanna, the minister of youth, may have cause to be peeved and to feel personally set upon by the global campaign by rights group Jamaicans for Justice (JFJ), which characterises this country as a systemic abuser of the rights of children.

Notwithstanding, this newspaper has two bits of advice for the minister. First, she should appreciate the difference between her own role and that of a campaigning organisation like JFJ.

Second, she must learn to hold her emotions in check, or perhaps improve on the quality of her public relations. For her act last week marked her, unfortunately, as a person deeply discomfited by criticism and ready to have the book thrown at those who cross her.

These are at odds with current notions of governance.

To be fair to Ms Hanna, it is not, insofar as we understand it, that she is arguing that there are not shortcomings in Jamaica's adherence to its obligations to children. Rather, the minister is upset that JFJ, as she sees it, did not place the issues in their full context, including her own efforts, to bring Jamaica in compliance with international and domestic law.

In that respect, this newspaper sympathises with Ms Hanna. For in its Internet petition, JFJ might have acknowledged developments of the past 18 months such as removing male detainees from the Horizon Detention Centre and the commitment to remove girls from the female prison at Fort Augusta to a special facility for juveniles being developed at the South Camp Road Correction Centre. Many children have also been removed from police lock-ups to children's homes.

We would add that there are genuine resource constraints that interfere with the ability of the Government to live up to both its legal and moral obligations to all its citizens, including children. That, however, does not obviate the right, even responsibility, of organisations like JFJ to identify and point out deficits, and in so doing, to be as irreverent as they like.

Indeed, this kind of scrutiny is not only good for democracy; it helps to hold our Government accountable and focused on its obligations.

The greater responsibility for measured engagement in such circumstances rests with governments. It is they who, without coercion, throw their hearts into the ring of public representation and are obliged to account for how they manage the people's affairs.

Over the top

When there are gaps in public information about how they go about their jobs, or even perceived mischief on the part of critics, it behoves governments to eschew hubris in explaining the basis for their actions.

Anger tends to create dissonance and interfere with the quality of communication. Indeed, in these circumstances, it is usually only the partisans who get the message.

In this regard, Ms Hanna's description of the JFJ's petition and actions as "disingenuous, dishonest, dangerous, and clearly designed to damage the reputation of the country" was clearly over the top.

But worse was her revelation that the organisation's petition had been sent to the attorney general to determine the possibility of criminal sanctions against the group. That suggests that the administration - which is now changing the law to remove criminal libel - would still like the right to silence its critics.

We should be assured that there is no such intent on the part of the Government and that Ms Hanna spoke out of turn.

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.