Weak leadership, politics trump human rights

TWO YEARS ago, Maxine Henry-Wilson asked members of the House of Representatives to determine whether they are delegates or leaders. The opposition backbencher argued then that even though the members of the lower House are elected by the people, they have a responsibility to bring leadership to the legislature and not merely be an echo of the view of constituents.

If there was ever a time that such leadership was required in the House it was last week, when Prime Minister Bruce Golding attempted to win the support of members for another extension of the state of emergency.

The resolution brought by Golding aimed to further suspend the fundamental rights and freedoms of persons living in Kingston, St Andrew and St Catherine. The suspension of these rights was an issue to which Opposition Leader Portia Simpson Miller spoke, but it rang hallow, and with good reason, too. Neither party in Parliament has made the protection of human rights a number one priority.

Charter of rights

The Gavel draws your attention to the Charter of Rights. This bill, which has been in the making for years, is righting the wrong in our Constitution which currently does not guarantee citizens their basic inalienable rights. Last parliamentary year, the Government debated the bill and then promised to compromise on some areas with the Opposition in order for the Charter to get the bipartisan support needed for its passage. It seems that no compromise has been hammered out as the bill fell off the Order Paper and has not been reintroduced.

But in this wanton show of hypocrisy, both parties have told Parliament how much respect they have for the rights of the Jamaican people - rights they have not found it possible to guarantee through the Charter of Rights - and that they are committed to defending those rights. We believe, whether as a symbolic step or a demonstration of good leadership, the Parliament must seek to pass the Charter of Rights before it can seek to take away from the citizen the unprotected bit that we now enjoy.

We are under no illusion that Tuesday's show was about national security or justice. From what we saw, it was clearly a political event. One could hardly miss the sotto voce remarks from members of the Government about who should be held responsible if the state of emergency was not extended and the crime figures increased. The idea was to force the Opposition's hand and hope its members would resist the state of emergency. If that were not the case, Golding's presentation to the House would not have been so shallow, and he would have avoided putting a political face to crime fighting. The Government side was clearly in on the plan, hence its dismissive reaction to a suggestion for Leader of Opposition Business Derrick Kellier for compromise talk. "Pressure!" some government members shouted.

The Opposition, too, was attempting 'a castle' on the political chess board. It, too, abandoned the position that it was unconstitutional to extend the state of emergency and was offering up a compromise, we note that the leader of the opposition was missing from the compromise talks. Even as a symbolic gesture, one would have hoped that Simpson Miller would have locked herself away with Henry-Wilson, Fitz Jackson, Peter Bunting, Golding, Andrew Holness and the few others who deliberated on the tie-breaker, which never came.

No moral ground won

The Gavel, meanwhile, has deliberated on Tuesday's saga and is firm in its view that neither the Opposition nor the Government has won any moral high ground out of this event. Time and utterances have begun to show that the Government did not want to keep the state of emergency in place. If it did, Prime Minister Golding would have seized the opportunity to ask the governor general to declare a new one. The parliamentary show was just an excellent opportunity for political gamesmanship and Golding, being a master at the craft, scored an 'A'.

There is no doubt that the Parliamentary Opposition failed miserably to demonstrate leadership on the day. It tried hard to compro-mise rights while at the same time offering a compromise even on its principled position not to vote for an extension of the state of emergency which, it argued, would have been unconstitutional. All its members abstained from the vote instead of voting against the resolution.

That is how delegates behave. Leaders are made of tough steel, not the copper cable that now lines the Opposition.

Email thegavel@glenaerjm.com.