Garth RattrayIT WOULD appear as if criminals have more rights than we do. They enjoy all the constitutional rights and the protection of human rights organisations should their situation warrant it. This is all well and good but they also take unto themselves superfluous 'rights' like the 'right' to make their own laws, the 'right' to prey upon society and the 'right' to a lifestyle paid for with the blood of their victims.
Recently appointed Govern-ment Senator, Professor Trevor Munroe, stated that we might have to give up some of our rights in order to facilitate the war on crime. Whereas I fathom the spirit of his suggestion it is difficult to entertain the idea that we may have to surrender some of our basic constitutional rights in order to have a chance at reducing crime. It's bad enough that because of criminality we have already lost our God-given right to live free of fear, our right to travel wherever and whenever we please on this beautiful island and our right to look forward to a wonderful future for this country. I believe that the authorities should leave what little rights we have left alone. We have been victimised enough.
Many will remember the State of Emergency called in 1976 in which 500 people were detained (this was the second since Independence, the first was in 1966). Additionally, the prolonged Suppression of Crime Act gave the Police Force wide-ranging powers of search and detention for years. The most visible result of the State of Emergency was the detention of members of the Opposition Jamaica Labour Party on questionable grounds. The general consensus was that it failed as an anti-crime measure although some argue that it may have derailed some clandestine criminal schemes.
Many members of the Jamaica Constabulary Force were trained and steeped in oppressive methods of crime control. The legacy of the State of Emergency and the attenuated Suppression of Crime Act is the ongoing hostility towards the Police within the inner-city communities, which has thwarted most efforts at co-operation and therefore facilitated the propagation of crime throughout the country.
I was pleased with most aspects of the speeches by Prime Minister Patterson and Minister Phillips on the proposed anti-crime measures. They very briefly outlined the plan to assign the security forces proactive roles indefinitely in order to dismantle organised crime. They explained that the days of the gunman were numbered (I'm paraphrasing). The ruling administration demonstrated its appreciation of the root causes of criminal activities by promising to attack crime with solid multi-faceted/multi-disciplinary socio-economic programmes aimed at long-term social reform. Minister Phillips also briefly alluded to a re-establishment of public order and enforcement of the Road Traffic Act. There was no mention of re-introducing the Suppression of Crime Act (thank heavens).
The current anti-crime plan utilises 'problem-oriented policing' (POP) a concept developed by Professor Herman Goldstein (1990), of the University of Wisconsin Law School and promulgated by the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF). The POP system involves not only responding to crimes but also addressing attendant problems surrounding the criminal act(s). From Minister Phillips' speech I infer that our anti-crime plan will also embrace the 'Broken Windows' theory developed by Drs. George L. Kelling and James Q. Wilson (March 1982). "If the first broken window in a building is not repaired, then people who like breaking windows will assume that no one cares about the building and more windows will be broken. Soon the building will have no windows."
In other words, whenever society tolerates general disorderly behaviour, indecent language, illegal sidewalk vending, unwelcome solicitation, roaming psychotics, windscreen-washers that sometimes intimidate and effectively extort money from fearful drivers and other seemingly minor infractions, it appears as if no one cares. Apathy becomes rampant. Opportunistic parasites (criminals) thrive under these conditions.
There is really no good reason for people to be allowed to walk around the city half-naked and barefooted; we have systems set up to deal with such unfortunate individuals. The Night Noise Act must be enforced. People who blow (honk) their horns at every possible opportunity must be prosecuted. Traffic regulations must be enforced with zero-tolerance at all times and not only when there is a specific drive on by the Police (such drives usually fade after a few weeks anyway). Bicycles must have lights on at nights, people must obey anti-litter laws and public transport busses must stop only at designated stops. Law, order and control must be maintained at all times.
Child labour laws must also be enforced and waifs who wander the streets must be taken into protective custody until their delinquent parents are summoned to answer charges of reckless endangerment of their progeny. Illegal sidewalk shacks must be removed (everyone knows that some are fronts for selling hard drugs).
The 'Broken Windows' theory validates my enduring belief that a society overridden with low-level crimes (so-called quality-of-life offences or what used to be called 'victimless' crimes) opens the proverbial door to much bigger and dangerous infractions. If disorder is allowed to escalate this will eventually lead to serious crime.
When he was Mayor of New York City, Rudolph W. Giuliani made use of the innovative suggestions put forward by Nathan Glazer, George Kelling, Peter Salins and other urban thinkers in a special issue of City Journal (1992) about reducing crime in New York City using POP and 'Broken Windows.' Both proved to be extremely effective crime-fighting techniques.
When crime in New York City was reduced civil rights were not surrendered. The city clamped down on seemingly trivial crimes because as it turns out, whenever little, petty crimes and traffic offences are left unchallenged the true 'victims' are social order and discipline. One thing leads to another until criminals become emboldened by society's demoralisation.
Critics who perceive hard-line enforcement of small crimes as being draconian, fail to see the important connection between an orderly/disciplined society and murder. It is almost impossible for crime to thrive within a disciplined society; it's psychology plain and simple.
Dr. Garth A. Rattray is a medical doctor with a family practice.
