I am genuinely confused as to the role of Jamaicans for Justice (JFJ).

Commendably, it has brought some state abuses into serious public scrutiny, and since its establishment in 1999, some of our abused citizens have become household names, as were the alleged state abuses during the last administration that were well hammered into the public mind. JFJ declares that its raison d'etre is to 'bring about fundamental change in Jamaica's judicial, economic, social, and political systems in order to improve the present and future lives of all Jamaicans'.

Concerned

I do not pretend to be au fait with all that the JFJ has declared and acted on, but as a concerned citizen, I am posing a few questions for their attention:

1. What has JFJ done to address the travesty of justice perpetrated in the traffic courts where citizens can hardly win a case against a police officer, unless the officer of the state fails or refuses to turn up?

2. Why have some spokespersons come across as aggressively anti-government prior to September 2007, and hardly a whimper of protest has been heard from them since that date?

3. Is it that they believe that the cause of justice for Jamaica's citizens has been better served since the change of government? I genuinely would love to applaud such an achievement.

4. The swift, strident and unequivocal support by the JFJ of the Police Commissioner's transfer of the senior police officer from St Thomas is understandable, but isn't such support premature, given your stated mantra that "every person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law?"

5. Is the account of the member of parliament (MP) to be subjected to some verifiability test?

6. Is, in the mind of the JFJ, the Rodney Chin's 'quasi plea bargain' in the Cuban light bulb case a prescriptive or normative approach for justice in post-independence Jamaica?

I want to be assured that the JFJ is as non-partisan as suggested at its inception, and since then, in every official document, whether online or hard copy. There is a segment of the citizenry, who, like myself, would like to see the strident advocacy more evenly dispersed politically, without even a scintilla of bias. Right now, given the apparent political selectivity, I am not sure what to think.

I am, etc.,

WAT CHING