EDITORIAL - Whither JFJ?

Carolyn Gomes has long lectured public officials about the value of taking responsibility and of the decent thing to do when the acts for which they are held to account breach declared or implied policy, bring their organisations into disrepute, or are perceived to be injurious to the community. Even when they disagree with the assessment of their behaviour but have lost the confidence of their bosses and stakeholders, they have no option but to go.

Indeed, it is a standard to which she, as executive director of the Caribbean Vulnerable Communities Coalition, insisted that Professor Brendan Bain be held accountable in the UWI/CHART controversy, and the principle which we suspect she applied with her resignation this week as a director of the rights group Jamaicans for Justice (JFJ). In that respect, we congratulate Dr Gomes on her decision and the good sense of JFJ in accepting her resignation.

The development, however, highlights a number of fundamental issues, not least of which is the need for the JFJ to undertake an unblinkered analysis of, then determine and clearly communicate to the public what are its core functions. Along the way, it might apprehend critical facts about itself and its development, which other emerging institutions might find useful in avoiding emerging pitfalls.

CONTROVERSIAL COURSE

In the absence of more specific information, the obvious trigger for Dr Gomes' resignation was the furore over a sexual health education course in children's homes, developed and promoted by JFJ when she was still executive director, but which critics claim promotes gay sex, or, at the very least, was age inappropriate.

JFJ agrees with the criticism of some of the content, has taken responsibility and has apologised. But it is not clear where things went wrong, especially in the face of the claim by its partner on the project, the Jamaica Family Planning Association, that elements of the curriculum were beyond what it agreed to. The obvious, and implied, 'culprit' in the circumstances, unless there is a show of hands by other JFJ board member(s), is Dr Gomes. And that brings to the fore issues of the matter of organisational growth and oversight and governance, issues of considerable concern to the former JFJ director and the organisation itself.

APPROPRIATING POWER

Assuming, as they claim, JFJ directors faltered in their oversight responsibilities on this project, it is easy to understand how it might have happened. Recall that Dr Gomes was not merely a founding member of the organisation; she inspired its creation, embodied it and was, for nearly a decade and a half, its primary spokesperson. She transitioned from the role of chairman to executive director.

It is easy in these kinds of environments for de facto leaders, especially those with strong personalities like Dr Gomes', to appropriate power, excessive power and/or influence, even when that is not their specific intent. Long incumbency and, often, overdue deference to the leader, exacerbate such accumulations of authority.

It would be ironic if this was indeed the case with JFJ and Dr Gomes who, after she stepped down as executive director, stayed on as a member of the board, where her influence would still be considerable. For it is a feature of the island's political parties, which JFJ and Dr Gomes frequently inveighed against. In this period of introspection, the JFJ should decide what it wants to be.

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.