JFJ responds to Kevin Chang

[The following article was submitted by the civic action group - Jamaicans for Justice.]

JAMAICANS FOR Justice read, with disappointment, Kevin O'Brien Chang's article in The Sunday Gleaner on June 20, and found unfortunate the blatant lack of fairness and balance displayed in it. Apparently, because he does not like (or has not bothered to read) the many documented solutions for reducing crime proposed by JFJ over the years (solutions that have been shared with him on more than one occasion, and as recently as two weeks ago) he says, completely without foundation, that we don't ever "[come] up with any practical proposals of [our] own".

For the purpose of setting the record straight for those who are willing to have an honest dialogue, we will once more set out our solutions to crime in Jamaica, positions articulated over many years to many persons at many levels including the National Security Strategy committee and Joint Select Committees of Parliament considering the Terrorism Prevention Bill, the Independent Commission of Investigations Act, the Special Prosecutors Act, and the 'crime bills'. Additionally, we have made submissions and/or proposals to the Justice Reform Task Force, the Strategic Review of the Constabulary Force, various ministers of security, various task forces, including the MacMillan Task Force and the National Committee on Crime and Violence.

These proposals can be summarised as follows:

• Fix the police force - to that end, we have endorsed the recommendations of the Strategic Review of the Jamaica Constabulary Force, some of which are proposals from JFJ.
  
• Implement fully, community-based policing - in this paradigm, police and community work together to devise solutions to crime issues locally. We are heartened by the JCF's commitment to roll out community-based policing in Tivoli Gardens. We point to its success at reducing crime rates dramatically in areas such as August Town and Grants Pen, where it is being implemented.
  
• Fix the justice system - to that end, we have endorsed the recommendations of the Justice Reform Task Force Report, some echoing submissions made by JFJ, and continue to push for them to be implemented, including the establishment of the independent Court Services Agency to make the judiciary financially and administratively independent of the Ministry of Justice.
  
• Plan and then roll out targeted community interventions, which should include some or all of the following as appropriate - psychological interventions, values-based resocialisation, anti-gang strategies, alternative dispute resolution, skills training, rights-based development and economic and social empowerment strategies. The track record of the Violence Prevention Alliance at reducing murders in communities by as much as 40 per cent using these types of interventions is an example to be followed. Community interventions will have to be tailored to the needs of individual communities and their stage of development.

That these proposed solutions do not seem to suit Mr O'Brien Chang (for reasons he can't or won't articulate) doesn't render them 'non-existent' and his failure to at least acknowledge them and JFJ's role in articulating them is to be deplored.

As for his 'polls', more scientific studies than Mr Chang's (including surveys done by Bill Johnson in 2007 and 2009 and by Mark Wignall in 2010) have found that JFJ's favourable rating among those sampled is above 40 per cent (in some polls as high as 83 per cent) and our unfavourable rating down at 21 per cent (below 15 per cent in some polls). Be that as it may, polls and popularity do not drive the work of JFJ - logical researched and principled positions are what we work toward.

SPECIOUS REASONING

To that end, we cannot support specious reasoning which links the State of Emergency to a drop in the murder rate while stating that "No one is quite sure what has caused the drop in the slaughter". Nor can we agree that the deaths of citizens of Jamaica, which Mr O' Brien Chang in his article fails either to acknowledge or lament, is the equivalent of 'breaking eggs'. Indeed, we find the analogy offensive and backward, consistent with a pattern of thinking that has prevented us, as a nation, from being able to fix the crime problem over these many years.

We are also curious about Mr O'Brien Chang's support for the 'crime bills'. Has he read the crime bills? Has he considered the practical effect of the bills? Does he support all aspects of these bills? Has he been given empirical evidence to suggest that these crime bills will reduce crime, or does he think they will work because they are called 'crime bills'?

We urge Mr O'Brien Chang to strive to present his views with balance in the future, even if he persists in what we consider to be illogical thought processes that ignore evidence. Facts are still facts even if they do not suit his 'agenda of the month'.

Feedback may be sent to ja.for.justice@cwjamaica.com or columns@gleanerjm.com