- FileThe military's presence on Jamaica's streets has been constant as the country walks the line of preserving law and order while maintaining human rights.
Lloyd Williams, Senior Associate Editor
SOME SECTORS of the Jamaican ociety have begun behaving as if the criminality that has been manifesting itself for years in this fair land of ours, originated with the recently-formed Jamaicans for Justice, and other human rights groups.
And so, suddenly, "human rights" have become dirty words.
It wasn't too long ago that we were so proud of our human rights tradition, boasting all over the world about our exemplary human rights record.
At the Judicial Colloquium of the Domestic Application of International Human Rights Norms in Guyana in September 1996, we subscribed to the view that "Fundamental human rights and freedoms are universal and are inherent in all human kind".
And that "Respect for human rights under the rule of law provides the best environment for the economic, social and cultural development of everyone in all parts of the world".
And that "Fundamental human rights and freedoms are more than mere pious aspirations. They form part of the public law of every nation, protecting individuals and minorities against the misuse of powers by public authorities of all kinds. It is the special province of judges to see to it that the law's undertakings are realised in the daily life of people. In a society ruled by law, all public institutions and authorities - legislative, executive and judicial - must act in accordance with the constitution and the law.
"The legislative and executive branches of government have a duty to provide the necessary means to secure the equal protection of the law, speedy and effective access to justice, and effective legal remedies..."
Long before that we subscribed to the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
On February 11, 1991, Patrick Robinson, Jamaica's deputy solicitor-general, was elected president of the Inter-American Human Rights Commission. Before that, he had served on several commission teams visiting regional countries to examine reported human rights violations.
Before that, and since then, there have been several other Jamaicans involved in articulating on the international scene, Jamaica's human rights stance. So Jamaica's voice on human rights, has been heard for years at forums ranging from the United Nations, to the Organisation of American States, to Commonwealth Heads of Government Conferences.
Why the excitement?
So what was, and is, our involvement with human rights at regional and international forums all about? Just empty rhetoric? Jumping on another bandwagon? Certainly not.
Jamaicans for Justice, the Jamaican Council for Human Rights, and Amnesty International are quite capable of defending themselves. It seems to me though that what they are saying is that all Jamaicans, whoever they are, wherever they live, whatever they do, whatever their race, sex, colour or creed, have fundamental human rights which ought to be protected by the rule of law. The rule of law is fundamental to any realisation of human rights. Human rights aim to incorporate respect for human dignity into the processes of government and law.
So nobody, be he journalist, Member of Parliament, civil servant, superintendent of police, lawyer, politician, ace crime-fighter, doctor, businessman, area leader, detective, road contractor, drug don, building contractor, political activist, Prime Minister, Opposition Leader, should be above the law, and public officials, no matter how high up the echelon, must, like all private individuals, be under the same obligation to obey the same law of the same land.
Changing times
We seem to forget that times have changed. And that we do now live in Marshall McLuhan's global village.
The scores of diplomats who work in Jamaica, are the eyes and ears of the countries they represent. It is their job to know everything that goes on in this country and a great many of them are very good at their jobs. Each day they share by phone, fax and V-SAT, the knowledge they have gleaned, with the policymakers back home, whether that is the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada or Trinidad and Tobago. And the decision-makers act on their information. Their words carry weight.
But quite apart from that, each year the United States Congress publishes a report on Human Rights in Jamaica and in several other countries.
Why do they do the reports? The U.S. State Department explains that the reports are submitted to the Congress by the Department of State in compliance with the Foreign Assistance Act and the Trade Act. The law provides that the Secretary of State shall transmit to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate, by February 25 each year, a full and complete report regarding the status of internationally recognised human rights, in countries that receive assistance from the U.S. and in all other foreign countries which are members of the United Nations and which are not otherwise the subject of a human rights report. Also the U.S. Congressional Human Rights Country reports include reports on several countries that do not fall into the categories established by the American statutes and that are thus not covered by the congressional requirement.
The U.S. Congress has also written into law formal requirements that U.S. foreign and trade policy take into account countries' human rights and worker rights performance and that country reports be submitted to the Congress annually. The first reports, in 1977, covered only countries receiving U.S. aid, numbering 82; in 1998 a total of 194 reports were submitted.
In August 1993, the U.S. Secretary of State moved to strengthen further the human rights efforts of American embassies. All sections in each embassy were asked to contribute information and to corroborate reports of human rights violations, and new efforts were made to link mission programming to the advancement of human rights and democracy.
Broader sweep
In 1994 the Bureau of Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs was reorganised and renamed the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labour, reflecting both a broader sweep and a more focused approach to the interlocking issues of human rights, worker rights, and democracy. The human rights reports put out by the U.S. Government reflect the efforts of hundreds of State Department, Foreign Service, and other U.S. Government employees.
"Our embassies, which prepared the initial drafts of the reports, gathered information throughout the year from a variety of sources across the political spectrum, including Government officials, jurists, military sources, journalists, human rights monitors, academics, and labour activists", the U.S. State Department explains.
The reports are used as a resource for shaping policy, conducting diplomacy, and making assistance, training, and other resource allocations. Also, they serve as a basis for the U.S. Government's co-operation with private groups to promote the observance of internationally recognised human rights.
Following is a summary of the U.S. Congressional Country Report on Human Rights in Jamaica for 1990:
"The excessive use of lethal force by police officers is Jamaica's most persistent human rights problem. Conditions in Jamaican prisons remain appalling, with serious overcrowding, poor sanitary conditions, and inadequate diet, the norm. Other concerns include electoral violence and fraud, failure properly to institutionalise accountability for police abuses, and an overburdened judiciary. However, the courts did successfully prosecute several lawsuits against police officers for assault and other human rights violations.
"While officially sanctioned murder of political opponents does not occur in Jamaica, unjustified use of lethal force and fatal abuse of detainees by police are serious problems. According to police statistics, officers killed 89 persons and wounded 59 in shooting incidents through the end of August 1990, while nine police officers were killed and 23 wounded in the line of duty during the same period. The disparity in the ratio of persons killed by police to those wounded gives credence to charges by human rights groups that some officers are engaging in summary executions of suspects".
A summary of the 1999 Human Rights Report on Jamaica states:
"The Government generally respects the human rights of its citizens; however, serious problems remained in several areas. Members of the security forces committed extrajudicial killings and beatings and carried out arbitrary arrests and detentions.
"Although the Government moved effectively to punish some of those involved, continued impunity for police who commit abuses remain a problem. Prison and jail conditions remained poor; overcrowding, brutality against detainees, poor sanitary conditions, and inadequate diet are problems. The judicial system was overburdened, and lengthy delays in trials were common. Violence and economic discrimination against women remained problems. Child labour is a problem. Mob violence of those suspected of breaking the law also remained a problem.
There were no reports of political killings.
"The security forces frequently employed lethal force in apprehending criminal suspects, usually in the guise of shoot-outs. This resulted in the killing by police of 151 persons during the year. While allegations of 'police murder' were frequent, the validity of some of the allegations was suspect. This problem is the result of unresolved, longstanding antipathy between the security forces and certain communities, especially among the urban poor. The JCF conducted both administrative and criminal investigations into incidents involving fatal shootings by the police. The JCF policy statement on the use of force incorporates U.N.-approved language on basic principles on the use of force and firearms by law enforcement officials".
So we have improved and, some would argue, benefited from the reports. They help to keep us honest.
Senior Superintendent Charles Simpson, chairman of the Police Officers' Association, hit the nail on the head a couple of years ago when he described policing as "the most visible form of Government."
Empty words
The rhetoric in Parliament, the pronouncements in the courts, the preachings from the pulpit, the speeches from the service club podiums on human rights mean precious little to the average man on the street.
E. George Green, the former senior Parliamentary ombudsman, explained this in his inimitable style in October 1987 while addressing a workshop in Ocho Rios on International Human Rights Law in the Commonwealth Caribbean.
He said: "To the man on the Papine minibus the policeman on beat duty is the most visible, the most tangible manifestation of the Law, 'the Rule' and Human Rights. He represents in most instances the only aspect of Government's machinery for promoting human rights with which the citizen comes in contact. He judges the Government's true stance on human rights not by the volume of high-sounding rhetoric which emanates from the throats of those who pontificate from the rarified atmosphere of Mount Olympus but from the brutality or humanity of the treatment handed out by the police."
The practice of human rights begins on every street and lane and road right here in Jamaica. Let's never forget it.
