December 1, 2000
JAMAICANS UNITED AGAINST POLICE BRUTALITY Open letter to Delroy Chuck, Jamaica Labour Party member of Parliament. You are to be commended for being one of the most outspoken politicians on the endemic problem of police brutality in Jamaica. The following comments in one of your recent Gleaner columns are an example of what distinguishes you from the rest of your colleagues. "Crime and violence are out of control, and will remain out of control, as long as we apply the same remedy of abusive brute force, inhumane practices and tyrannical measures." "The so-called war on crime has failed, and will continue to fail, if we see a whole community as the enemy to be brutalised and treated as if they were all criminals. That culture of police abuse and state tyranny is predicated on the misguided belief that creating and maintaining fear and coercing respect for superior state power can control crime. That is the method and measure of tyrannical regimes." Not many members of your Jamaica Labour Party, even though safely in opposition, would be publicly prepared to admit that police policy is designed to criminalize and terrorize innercity communities. The fact is, that as government-in-waiting, and as history dictates, the JLP may soon be directing the same police tactics, just as they have sanctioned it in the past. The record indicates that under the JLP government of the 1980s, police killings averaged more than 200 per year. In 1984 alone, more than 300 people were killed by the police. The fact that under the PNP government of the 1990s the police are killing 150 per year does not mean that things have gotten any better. One police execution per year is unacceptable. The fact is that both political parties rely on brutal police methods as a form of social control. Hence the dilemma that faces you as man of conscience. Granted that you were not a member of government during the 1980s, but the question still remains: how can you have such strong views about police brutality and yet be a member of a political party that must inevitably rely on the same brutal police methods if and whenever it becomes the ruling party? You might well respond that things will change in the future. But is there anyone in this universe, apart from die-hard JLP party supporters, who would take such words at face value. To be taken seriously by reasonably objective people, Delroy Chuck would have to be prepared to publicly criticize his party's past practice, challenge its present thinking, and demonstrate how police practice will change under a future JLP government. Indeed, it is on this issue of what will happen in the future, that the seeming sincerity of your comments begin to come apart. Pragmatism is a useful word to describe this aspect of your article. For example, after literally accusing Senior Superintendent Adams of leading a terrorist charge against innocent inner-city communities, you incredibly end up praising the gentleman. "I have a great deal of respect for SSP Adams as a crime-fighter, fearsome police officer and tough hombre. He is someone we want to succeed and to control the escalating crime wave." Incredibly, how do you end up praising a man despite making the following criticisms? ‘The Crime Management Unit, under the command of Senior Superintendent Reneto Adams, is an anathema to our mission of creating a kinder and gentler society. Its crime-fighting techniques are more likely to brutalise communities and increase criminality instead of calming our fears and reducing crime. The strategy being applied cannot work, has never worked and in the long-term can only frustrate the dedicated community police officers who police their communities with much success. The strategy, it is clear, is vested in the misguided notion that the inner-city communities must be put under manners, in fear, threatened and brutalised into submission, as the Crime Management Team parades, promotes and signals its superior force to the dons, the gangs and whoever dares." Clearly, by paying such homage to Adams, that "tough" hombre, wanting him to ‘control' the crime wave (resorting to the foolish middle class belief that men like Adams can ‘control' crime) nullifies whatever value there is in your analysis or observations. How are your constituents in Grants Pen to understand your "respect" for Adams when by your own words he is responsible for terrorizing them? . "It was not the first time the Crime Management Team entered the area and created havoc, as it seems to do in every community it enters. Some weeks ago, it came in two nights in a row, roughed-up the residents, abused the women, threatened the young men and promised to return. A professional researcher, a woman of high repute, happened to be on the scene on both occasions, as she conducted studies for the USAID Development Program for Grants Pen and, she reports, was appalled at the abusive behaviour of supposedly professional policemen." On what basis then do you "respect" Adams? Or is it that as a pragmatic politician, looking towards being the government of the future, you realize that you must live with Adams, and therefore you must "respect" him? Do you believe that the men, women and children who have suffered at the hands of Adams and his men respect him? Do you believe that the families of the men who have died under questionable circumstances at the hands of the Crime Management Unit respect Adams? Do you believe that the men who have been scraped up out of their communities and locked up without charge respect Adams? Do you believe that the men and women who have been assaulted and suffered physical injuries at the hands of Adams and his men respect him? Do you believe that people in innercity communities who know they are ALL subject to the same treatment by Adams and his men will find it possible to have the same respect as you do? After having delivered a devastating critique of Adams' style of leadership of the Crime Management Unit, you suddenly "cannot explain why the Crime Management Team should behave in this manner." Your loss for words at a critical moment of your article fools no one. The truth is that you have yet to find the political courage to demand that Adams be dismissed and criminally investigated for involvement in several murders, purportedly "shootouts," since becoming head of the Crime Management Unit, and even before, such as the Mountain View Avenue killing earlier this year. Instead you "respect" him and call him a "tough hombre." One doesn't have to be Freud to understand that this is the middle class side of Delroy Chuck which so typifies the middle class desire for a Reneto Adams to defend and protect them against the underclass hordes? Clearly poor and working class people of Jamaica are on a collision course with an unjust and morally bankrupt state machinery which relies on brutal police methods in order to maintain social control Political parties, including those in opposition, are no less part of the state machinery. Even politicians like yourself are ultimately of little use to the people because your loyalty is first and foremost to the state. The dilemma facing Jamaica's ruling class, but which it does not yet understand, is that either the state ends its reliance on brutal police methods or run the risk of the people taking matters in their own hands, dismantling the police force and, surely replacing it with something "kinder and gentler" and more just. Frankly, the second option is far more appealing because it would mean a more thorough and long-lasting solution to the problems of crime and justice than our present lot of politicians could ever deliver. Lloyd D'Aguilar
FROM OUR CORREPONDENT Reneto Adams continues his psychopathic behaviour. A number of Wilmot Perkins' radio callers today said they had seen or experienced Adams' brutality. I was mostly on the road, catching bits and pieces of the programme on the radio. I heard a man called Fisher whose name was called along with Andrew Phang's on Friday. Fisher reports being brutalized by Adams since last Friday. Fisher has a case in court where police shot him when he was riding his motor bike, and then arrested Fisher for shooting at them. The CCN {Police] news report then said two men on a motor bike shot at them and they returned the fire hitting one of the men. The other man escaped and the bike crashed. Fisher said he was riding his bike alone when police shot him, and he stopped the bike when he was shot. Fisher's particular reason for calling the show was the threat by police in Adams' team (I can't remember if it was Adams himself) to kill Fisher before his case is called up again on December 11. Fisher was calling from Delroy Chuck's office, as Delroy asked him to call Mutty to publicize the threat. Click here to return to Jamaicans United Against Police Brutality homepage. |