Ian Boyne

As cruel as it seems to say so, Jamaica has not yet reached the tipping point in its revulsion against the murderous mob, nor in its awareness of what we are up against. As long as we still have influential voices downplaying the need for tough, forceful policing, dismissing this as merely a "panic reaction," then we are still in denial.

Wilmot Perkins will scathingly attack this very headline as the kind of "muddled and dangerous thinking" which has contributed to the high murder rate which we are experiencing. He will say that every time there is a spike in murders there are people like me who 'panic' and are willing to have the rights of poor ghetto people trampled, while we ignore the fundamental causes of crime - "the failure to grow the economy and provide opportunity to people".

brutalisation

The thinking of people like Boyne and Robotham is so clouded and deficient that they can only fall back on "the same old failed policy of brutalising poor ghetto people and denying their human rights, which they think only uptown people are entitled to". Robotham can safely call for the detention of ghetto people from his safe ivory tower in New York, where he is enjoying the delights of First World existence, Perkins would probably scoff.

The problem is not that the Government is unprepared to deal with crime decisively. The problem is that influential sections of the society are not yet prepared for any tough, resolute measures the Government might be willing to adopt. And you know politicians take their cue from the media.

I am personally happy to see that the prime minister is talking tough and sending the message to criminals that while he has traditionally been a strong advocate of human rights that must not be interpreted to mean that he is soft and whimpish in dealing with a set of people whom last Wednesday he termed "vicious animals".

criminals think twice

Golding was unequivocal as he spoke on his Jamaica House Live call-in show last Wednesday. "We have to get to the stage where the criminals know that committing a crime is hazardous. We have to get to the stage where the criminals have to think twice before they commit a crime, for they know that we are out to get them". Committing himself to "tough, hard policing", he said, "we can't negotiate with criminals and say to them, how much you going to kill this week? Don't bother kill six; only kill two. We cannot allow criminals to feel that they are running things".

The prime minister made it absolutely clear that hard policing without the accompanying measures of social intervention, social renewal, community regeneration and economic empowerment would again fail. Motty Perkins, Cliff Hughes and the very important and valuable human rights community must see that we are not talking either/or. Those of us who support hard policing and a strong policy of deterrence to criminals must understand that unless the root causes of crime are tackled, we will keep on coming up with short-term emergency measures while reproducing the negative outcomes.

We must understand and make it clear that we do not believe that merely detaining people for 90 days, curfewing communities, using force to capture criminals and taking them out when necessary can solve our crime problem. Those who read my columns know that I am an advocate for economic empowerment of the masses and a critic of neo-liberalism which does not pay sufficient attention to human development and equity issues.

If the poor and marginalised continue to be neglected or sacrificed on the altar of a lopsided economic 'development', then we will continue to pay a heavy price.

I am delighted at the fact that all the social classes now understand and are saying openly that we can't continue to neglect the poor and disenfranchised while we build our capitalist economy. Progressive people must capitalise on this consensus to press for concrete improvements for the lower classes.

But let us get one thing clear: It is nonsense and the height of buffoonery when you are faced with marauding gangs of terrorists and murderers who are killing babes, young and old women as well as pastors and grannies, to talk about social intervention, economic growth or even "values and attitudes" being the immediate solution.

police working condition

Yes, we know the police need better working conditions, better police stations, better pay. They need to gain the confidence of people so that people can feel free to talk to them and give them information to put away criminals. People must come to trust the police, who must respect them. Yes, I agree with Wilmot Perkins on all of that.

But when you are in government and are faced with multiple murders a day, and a doubling of those figures on the weekend, you have to do something right now. When people are terrified for their lives, you can't find the jobs this week and all the social amenities to turn these criminals into nice, water-baptised, Holy Ghost-filled people. You have to find a way to drive fear into their hearts right now so that they will know someone is coming after them and if they dare "test", they could join the roll call which will become the subject of another Amnesty or Human Rights Watch report about the "alarming number of police killings".

A policeman secures the crime scene at the intersection of Deanery Road and Deanery Avenue, where three men were shot dead on September 2, 2007.- File

police killings statement

(Incidentally, I am happy that the Prime Minister apologised to the police for not contesting that BBC Hardtalk interviewer's categorisation of the police killings as police murders. This was a very good signal to our troops and it sends the right message. Very good, Prime Minister). If criminals have no fear, but instead know all of us are in fear of them, then what's the incentive to put down the guns? Some $6,000 a week job we have to offer them through social intervention programmes? Some training programme through HEART/ NTA where they have to get up to go to classes rather than stay out all night in the dancehall, when they are not on their murderous spree?

In a society where witnesses and their relatives are routinely killed or burnt out, what's the incentive for people to report what they know? Some of the police officers themselves are in the pay of the criminal dons and area leaders. We have a very serious problem on our hands.

We know what to do. We need no new crime plan, no new crime study. We have some fine scholars who are a storehouse of relevant, practical information. We have former criminals who are now reformed and who would work with the state. The politicians themselves represent a great source of information. The politicians know who many of the criminals are, and if they don't know a particular shotta or 'soldier', they can easily find out. They have the network.

When people will not talk to police, they will talk to their politicians. Whom do these politicians think they are fooling?

This is where the power of civil society has to come in. But we have not reached the tipping point yet. We are not yet sufficiently shocked, I am sorry. You think we have seen enough murders and that we are sufficiently shocked and alarmed? Not yet.

The Government knows what to do. A lot of good work has already been done by the previous PNP Government. Significant work in legislative reform, in security policy etc. And there are the recommendations of the various reports out there.

The private sector needs to come on in a big way with some heavy funding - with at least $200 million in the first instance. Something similar to the former Butch Stewart initiative for the dollar must be launched. The big business people, the big companies in the society should come together in the way that Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush came together after the Asian tsunami to mobilise funds. Let us get rid of the excuse about lack of funding for security. International funding must be sourced and the Government must rearrange its own spending priorities.

But there are many things which don't need any funding and which we can do this week. Those must not be delayed.

hard life for dons

In the meantime, we have to make life hard for the dons, the area leaders and the shottas - even when we don't have the evidence to convict. There are too many criminals whom we know are animals but whom we know can walk around and smile at us for we have not a shred of evidence against them - and no one is foolish enough to risk his life to provide it in court. We can engage in legalistic debates if we want to - until the day when we reach the tipping point and realise what we are up against and awake from our denial. We are in a war with terrorists and we can't use conventional methods to fight this war.

We are not talking about using just short-term measures: I like the approach of the Prime Minister: He is saying let's go full speed ahead with social intervention, job creation, investments, rebuilding of trust, social capital etc. But he says we can't say to the criminals "soon come". Let's do both, but the more immediate of all is the hard policing.

Shottas, 'soldiers' and rude boys have to obey orders from the bigger dons for they know the consequences of not following the 'order'. It is nonsense to say that these guys don't fear so deterrence won't work. They are no suicide bombers. How are the dons and area leaders able to maintain power over them even when they have guns and have earned 'stripes'? Because of fear! The state cannot use terror and illegal means to defeat the criminals, for we would have capitulated to their methods.

But we have to find legal means of deterrence and we have to use force, when necessary, to get the criminals and their guns. Right now rude bwoy no fraid a police. That must change. And very fast.

Please send feedback to ianboyne1@yahoo.com or columns@gleanerjm.com