Reaping the whirlwind

Peter Espeut

I'M SURE that an abiding memory of all of us who were around in the late 1970s when the PNP was in government was the violence which led up to the 1980 election. The number of murders in that year was a record, broken in the run-up to the 1997 election when the PNP was again in power. And now once again we are in a run-up to another election with the PNP in government, and the murders and the violence continue to increase. Possibly 2001 will be another record-breaking year.

Then, as now, the Opposition argued that the Government was incompetent because it could not contain the violence which appeared random and senseless. The Government argued that the Opposition (and in 1980, the CIA) were behind the quite planned violence to make people feel unsafe, to ultimately bring down the Government. The violence ­ then as now ­ worked in the interest of the Opposition to discredit the Government, and the charges and counter-charges as to who is responsible have become part of the cut-and-thrust in the game of political chess, with us as pawns.

The question which needs to be answered is, is the violence "ordinary" criminality (as the Prime Minister would have us believe in a statement on Monday) or is it connected in some way with the upcoming election (in other words, is it political violence)? If it is the former, then the police must be challenged to do better. If it is the latter, then I don't know from where the solution can come, for the police are not immune from political influence.

In 1980, 1997, and now in 2001, Tivoli Gardens became the target of police action. In 1997, the police received "intelligence" that JLP gunmen were about to take a certain course of action, and an assault upon Tivoli was launched. Why are the police so willing to mount an assault on Tivoli Gardens in times like these? I do not put it past the JLP to pass on the sort of "intelligence" to foment an incident. In each case, they certainly have had their machinery ready to take advantage of the situation. And the delight with which the security forces invade Fortress Tivoli to search for guns needs examination.

This time more than twenty fatalities and forty injuries is the result. After forensic investigation it will be interesting to read the ballistics reports to see from which guns the injurious and fatal bullets have come. Why was the Prime Minister last Monday so careful to blame the violence on criminals and not on political thugs? After all, it was his Government that enacted a law that made it almost impossible to hang the perpetrators of political violence. That law makes it clear that in the eyes of our lawmakers (all of whom are politicians), 'political' murder is not as bad as other murder; it most likely will not fall into the category of "capital murder". A self-confessed political activist has told us on public radio that "Murder is a part of politics", and the partisans protect their own, and ultimately themselves. They have no shame!

There can be little doubt of the connection between politics (i.e. the upcoming election) and the current upswing in violence. In the past, politicians armed the basest elements among their supporters, who today still manage to act in the political interest of their patrons. Who can believe claims that political gunmen are "out of control" and are acting now as independents? The type of politicians we have in Jamaica have used violence as part of their campaign strategy in the past, and there is no reason to believe that this has changed. When a murder is judged to be political, it is left there, as these criminals have protection in high places. I do not know whether the police have the capability or the will to get the evidence to apprehend political criminals of all political stripes. The small number of political henchmen arrested would seem to support this. Can we really expect the same people who have bogussed elections in the past to institute free and fair elections now? Can we really expect the same people who encouraged political violence in the past to stop it now?

Suppose a political gunman is caught and sings loudly about where he got his gun and his instructions, the system would shake at its very foundations! So as not to make waves, the police prefer to shoot down suspects in the streets, which does not make us feel any more secure. The private sector now says they want to mediate a solution, the same private sector which has funded both political parties and their garrisons and their political thugs over the years. If you sow to the wind, you will reap the whirlwind, the Good Book tells us, and many in the private sector who have contributed are now hurting badly where it hurts them most ­ in the bottom line, for the amount of protection money they have to pay is increasing, and business is being scared away.

The best thing the private sector could do is to withhold all political contributions until the parties disassociate themselves from murder and violence. But that will never happen. There are elements in the private sector which have become wealthy from the largesse of the Government, and who are always willing to kick back a few million in return for more contracts. What they really want is a return to "normalcy", an unjust situation where things operate in their favour.

There will be no peace without justice, and the whirlwind will be with us a long time yet, until those who are sowing the wind wake up and realise what they are doing. Those of us committed to justice in Jamaica just have to keep our heads down and be extra careful.

Peter Espeut is a sociologist and executive director of an Environment and Development NGO.

Back to Commentary