Peter EspeutIF ANYONE really wanted to discover the alleged link between politicians and guns and drugs, this is how to do it: bug the telephones of politicians and dons, record their conversations, and see what you get. And anyone who engineered that the person who succeeded in belling the cat would be a clear candidate for National Hero.
If there are tapes which incriminate politicians and dons in guns and drugs and murder, I hope that many copies are made and circulated, for I don't know if there is any safe place to hide this sort of evidence. I am not comfortable with the tapes being evaluated in secret to determine whether criminal charges should be laid. If there are tapes, let the public hear them so we can judge for ourselves! And even if there is no criminal liability, we still need to know what those we have elected are up to, so we can decide their political future.
But I am dreaming! I don't believe for a minute that, if there are such tapes, that they were recorded for any patriotic or altruistic reason. Blackmail is a more likely scenario, and if that is true, there would be no profit in releasing the tapes to the public. That would be killing the goose that laid the golden egg.
I am a little surprised that the furore has been concentrated on the fact of the telephone tapping itself, and not on what might have been found out, which is much more important in my view. I get the impression that the Prime Minister has asked the Director of Public Prosecutions to investigate who might be guilty of telephone tapping, and not who might be guilty of corruption, drug dealing and murder which the wire-tapping might have uncovered.
I am not against telephone tapping per se; I don't respect my privacy so much that I would deny the proper authorities that method of criminal investigation. Of course, proper procedures must be in place so that telephone tapping is not used to gain a political or business advantage. I don't believe that any one person should have the authority to order wiretaps. Suppose that person needed to be investigated, who could give the order? Let a judge in chambers decide rather than any one person; if a judge is to be investigated then another judge can sign the order. Putting that authority in the hands of one person means that their telephone cannot legally be tapped.
And there are other forms of corruption which could be uncovered by the recording of telephone conversations. Favours bestowed on members of the private sector in return for secret campaign contributions could also come to light. How conflicts of interest between the public lives and private interests of public servants play out, could also be revealed.
Now that these alleged wiretaps have been exposed, I suppose that this strategy will now be less effective. But what the whole episode has shown me is that where there is a will to identify and prosecute crime and corruption, a way can be found. I must confess that I am impatient that in our history no gun-runners have ever been caught, and that no Mr. Bigs of the drug trade have ever been apprehended. It is long overdue!
But I have in the front of my mind the Montego Bay Street People Deportation Scandal, the death of handicapped youth Michael Gayle in police custody, the savage beating of prisoners in the St. Catherine District Prison and the death of Agana Barrett and two others in the Constant Spring police lockup. All these incidents were the subject of "top level investigations" and nothing has come of them. Will this be any different?
Requiem for John
My wife Velia and I are deeply saddened at the death on Monday evening of our friend, John Jones. Velia performed with him last year in TCL's production Once on this Island and previously in Fr. Holung's Working for the Lord, and she was impressed with his talent and his professionalism. I knew him from the seventies, and I will never forget one night when the band I was in ("Alpha Omega") and the band he was in ("Tomorrow's Children") both played at the Drumblair Dance at the St. Andrew Club. Of course we were relatively unknown, but he enjoyed our music so much that he joined us on the bandstand and sang with us as the patrons danced and the party was swinging. He took his music seriously, but he was a very jovial and witty person, and he was very pleasant to be with. Our profound sympathies go out to his wife Jean and his son Jason. Sing on John, and rest eternal be yours!
Peter Espeut is a Sociologist and Executive Director of an Environment and Development NGO.
