THE EDITOR, Sir:
DUE PROCESS. There is nothing sweeter to the ear of the democrat than due process: The condensation of the principle of equal liberty and the guarantee against the arbitrariness of fellow citizens as well as that of the agencies of the State.
Due process is undergirded by the fundamental assumption of innocence until reasonable doubt can be proven; in other words, one is not assumed to be guilty and then forced to bear the burden of proof to demonstrate otherwise.
Respect for due process entrenches an enlightened perspective of human nature, of the sanctity of life and of the quality of fraternity that lubricates the reciprocal relations which are foundational for successful communal living.
However, when this harmony is disturbed what should we expect? When security forces do not respect due process and abrogate or conflate the distinctions between judge, jury and executioner, how should decent society react? What recourse is available to the law-abiding citizen who has bought into the "myth" of due process? Is cynicism the child of such abuse, letting reign the perverted notions that justice is for "just us" (whites and honorary whites)?
Is the life of a policeman or policewoman more important, symbolically or otherwise, than mine own? Utter rubbish and nonsense! Let's forget the insupportable spiel that security forces represent the last line of defence between law and lawlessness. That line has already been erased when due process was besmirched by agents of State terrorism, whether sanctioned or not by the political directorate.
Society below Cross Roads and the Clock is no longer certain, unambiguously, of who the police are serving and protecting. And when one gunman kills a policeman we have to wonder if it is only the dress code that differentiates them.
I am etc.,
RYAN ONEAL PHILLIP PALMER
roppalmer@hotmail.com
Kingston 11
Via Go-Jamaica
