THE EDITOR, Sir:ONE CANNOT escape the impression that some commentators too often rush to judgment in a knee-jerk defence of self-righteously held positions. Sober reflection and thoughtful understanding of issues, not regurgitation of preconceived notions, is what the public needs and deserves.
It has been sometime now since SSP Reneto Adams made his 'semantics' comments, but the significance of what he said and public response to them will remain relevant. To my mind they require further thought. A plausible meaning of the Superintendent's statement is that the philosophical concept of presumption of innocence until proven guilty does not fit the reality that confronts him as an intelligent policeman in Jamaica. Maybe he is saying society does not respect this principle and the systems that are in place make it extremely difficult as well as self-defeating to apply it. One approach, therefore, would be to look at such principles again, in context, to see if they need some modification. This is far different and presumably less objectionable than a rejection of the principle itself.
But, in Jamaica there is a tendency to affect values and behaviour of other countries and cultures to which we ascribe a status superior to ours. Education in European values and history has produced the frame of reference for the middle class perception of Jamaican society, together with a misguided notion of intellectual and social sophistication based on these values.
Over and over again we are reminded of an historically generic ambivalence as to our own identity - European or Third World - which manifests itself in so many ways. Although the objective reality is that we are a Third World country our approach to the management of affairs too often reflects first world pretensions.
With such a mindset we subconsciously opt for, to paraphrase Professor H. Orlando Patterson, 'modernity rather than development'. Evidence of this is all around us, from public parks without the social/behavioural and cultural infrastructure to appreciate, sustain and protect them, to impressive social and physical structures, and industries like tourism, without an appropriate enabling environment. Is this development or mere play on words?
A frustrated SSP Adams must have had in mind those suspects who are seen to be guilty, obviously, but who through intimidation of witnesses, indifference or support for the accused, and a leaky custodial system, cannot be convicted in a court of law. Easy access to high-priced legal representation in a system that is not the most competent or resource-rich can skew justice away from the victim to the accused.
Since lofty principles cannot be applied in a vacuum, nor can they be imposed in a democracy, attention needs to concentrate more on creating a culture and society that are supportive of these laudable ideals. On a talk show recently, one of the hosts naively opined that political parties ought to be able to mount their flags in any part of a constituency. A stakeholder on the programme seemed to dismiss such naivety on the basis that things do not work that way on the ground. All of this is being said in the context of a code of conduct for political activity, ceremonially signed by leaders of the major political parties. Result? In a free society, free people are prevented from freely expressing their political preference in any part of a free country that they wish. This could lead to an open-ended curtailment of freedom of expression. If this is not to become 'semantic', the Tawes Pen culture needs to be changed.
Was SSP Adams trying to remind us of this?
The point is that there is an urgent need to re-examine notions that we so readily accept and seem to expect to work automatically.
How ironical that disturbed by what it considers to be an imbalance between the rights of the accused and those of the victim, the United Kingdom government wants to rebalance the justice system in favour of the victim. Due to increasing violence there is the growing public impression that the legal process rewards the guilty because of inadequate police work and skilful defence lawyers. Prime Minister Blair is seeking to redress this imbalance, away from the accused. Even the sacrosanct trial by jury is up for review!
Rather than simplistically demonising SSP Adams, the discussion ought to be on how creatively to adapt those hallowed and enlightened principles of the British justice system to the Jamaican historical and cultural reality.
I am, etc,
H. DALE ANDERSON
hdaleanderson@hotmail.com
