The thing about bending rules

[evanovitch]

So the greatest Reggae show on earth, Sumfest, is to be exempted from the Noise Abatement Act.

And Mrs Veronica Campbell-Brown, Jamaica's 200m Olympic Gold medallist and world 100m champion, may, according to talk in the streets, edge out one of the ladies who, according to the rules of the Jamaica Amateur Athletics Association (JAAA), are entitled - by virtue of finishing in the top three in the 100m race at last week's national trials - to an automatic spot on the team to Beijing, as long as they maintain form.

We're sure that both events, which will involve a bending of the rules, will be welcomed by many. In the case of Reggae Sumfest, proponents will probably argue, as promoter Mr Robert Russell did, that since the festival is a national event, which attracts the tourist dollar and provides employment to many Jamaicans, the law should not be applied to it. According to Mr Russell, who was quoted in last week's edition of our sister title, the Observer West, if the police enforce the law by locking down the festival at midnight on Thursday night, he'd cancel it.

Those who would see Mrs Campbell-Brown run the 100m, even though she didn't qualify at the trials as required by the JAAA, will probably argue that she is the ideal female athlete to enhance Jamaica's medal haul, even though the JAAA is clear that the rule must be observed.

There's no denying the superficial attractiveness of their arguments.

However, the thing about bending the rules arbitrarily is that the confusion and fallout that inevitably follow, in many instances, are not, in many cases, worth it.
<span style="font-weight: bold">
Take the Sumfest case.</span>

In a letter to the editor in yesterday's edition, one Mr Geoff Madden invites the authorities to call Mr Russell's bluff (for that's what it was... we all know he has no intention of cancelling Sumfest in this life).

&quot;If he is too big to live within the law, then to hell with it all,&quot; writes Mr Madden. A televised poll on the issue showed 66 per cent disagreeing with the decision to bend the law for Reggae Sumfest and as soon as the intention was announced to allow Mr Russell to carry on with the show beyond 2:00 am, stipulated by the law on weekdays and weekends respectively, notwithstanding the inconvenience that will be experienced by residents of the nearby community of Catherine Hall, promoters of other big events began to ask why they shouldn't be allowed similar privileges.

After all, they too create employment via staging of their shows. In several cases they contract the very same artistes to perform. In fact, take away the glitzy public relations which cloak the slackness and sleaze that accompanies the culturally legitimate fare that Sumfest offers, and there's really not much to differentiate it from the other shows which have been made to comply with the law.

Unless, of course, one is expected to understand that Sumfest, by virtue of its clientele or ownership, is somehow superior. If this is the case, it's sad. For Jamaica has already dallied too far down the road of unruliness and anarchy to be reinforcing what amounts to irrational classicism.

The authorities responsible for the Noise Abatement Act knew what they were getting into when they approved it. They knew it wouldn't go down well with the promoters and that some level of adjustment in the national psyche would be necessary in order to accept the changes. However, they went ahead with it for several reasons, not least among them being the need to strike some balance between the need for people to go out and have a good time and the need for others to enjoy a bit of peace and quiet after a long, hard day.

The same goes for the JAAA. They knew very well when they crafted their rules that on a fair application of them, sometimes the crowd's favourite pick would get eliminated. But they set them down anyway, because they knew that in order for the event to maintain any semblance of credibility deserving of the public's respect and money, it had to exist upon a level playing field.

We're not saying that the authorities should never bend or modify the rules. We're just saying that when they do, it should be done for logical and credible as opposed to irrational and arbitrary reasons.

[Tuff Gong]

Re: The thing about bending rules


I could not believe that JLP Government had caved in to this guy, how could they enforce Night Noises anywhere in Jamaica after this?

[neutral]

Re: The thing about bending rules

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tuff Gong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I could not believe that JLP Government had caved in to this guy, how could they enforce Night Noises anywhere in Jamaica after this? </div></div>

Thats exactly what I thought,their little noise abatement rule can never have any credibility after this,....eedyat ting dat,..if yu have a rule in place enforce it regardless of who it upset.

[bee_bop]

Re: The thing about bending rules

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Newtriment</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tuff Gong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I could not believe that JLP Government had caved in to this guy, how could they enforce Night Noises anywhere in Jamaica after this? </div></div>

Thats exactly what I thought,their little noise abatement rule can never have any credibility after this,....eedyat ting dat,..if yu have a rule in place enforce it regardless of who it upset. </div></div>

Littleman says:
<span style="color: #660000">Money talks...Sumfest carry the swing...</span>

[Tuff Gong]

Re: The thing about bending rules

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Littleman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Littleman says:
<span style="color: #660000">Money talks...Sumfest carry the swing...</span> </div></div>

A Swing in the wrong direction!

[Tuff Gong]

Re: The thing about bending rules

EDITORIAL - <span style="font-family: 'Arial Black'">Police credibility and night-noise abatement</span>
publ<span style="font-style: italic">ished: Monday | July 7, 2008 </span>

THERE IS an argument by some, not entirely without merit in the circumstance, that the police, rather than allocating resources to seeking out and shutting down, under the Noise Abatement Act, public events that go beyond the stipulated time, would better expend their energies fighting serious crimes, such as murders, shootings, rapes and robberies.

The police chief, Rear Admiral Hardley Lewin, has made adherence to the night-noise law part of a zero-tolerance strategy, which he believes is a critical component of his larger strategy for fighting Jamaica's crisis of crime and criminal violence. We do not wish to second-guess Admiral Lewin and senior officers; and neither do we expect that of the national security minister, Colonel Trevor MacMillan, or others in the administration.

Indeed, it was not so long ago that Prime Minister Golding was reminding Jamaicans that when it came to fighting crime and other broader security issues, the minister was responsible for policy; the commissioner holds sway over operational matters. That is the law.

Law as play putty

But then, the law, in the context of Jamaica, may not be a shackle, but a variable instrument, or perhaps play putty, to be kneaded and shaped in the current circumstance, depending on whose interest is at stake. Or, that can be expected to be the interpretation of those promoters who have had their entertainment events shut down for breaching the Noise Abatement Act and those who apply to hold events in the future and are told that they must keep within designated time slots.

Colonel MacMillan, no doubt, expects this after the directive issued by his ministry for the police to give free rein to the annual reggae music festival, Reggae Sumfest, which is to be held soon in Montego Bay. Its events will not be closed down at two o'clock in the morning.

According to one of Sumfest's directors, Mr Robert Russell, &quot;We may go until about 6 a.m. if it becomes necessary, but not beyond.&quot; He has the leeway because Colonel MacMillan wrote to the police chief directing leniency for Sumfest on the grounds that the festival was an important tourism and economic event. Admiral Lewin was expected to so command the head of the St James police, Superintendent Steve McGregor.

Selective application of noise act

Mr Russell rejects the view that his organisation was being done a special favour. After all, he argues, Sumfest is of national significance; and in any event, it was allowed to operate within its own time guidelines during the former administration. Which, of course, is beside the point.

The real issue is that the police's policy has changed regarding their application of the Noise Abatement Act. Under Admiral Lewin, it is to be rigidly enforced. Colonel MacMillan calls for its selective application, at least in the case of Reggae Sumfest.

It seems to us that this issue has the potential for calling into question the credibility of Admiral Lewin, his capacity to make and enforce operational policy, as well as the administration's commitment to the demarcation between the roles of the minister and the police chief, which, ironically, was put in place when Colonel MacMillan was head of the constabulary. Yet, this is not the most fundamental question. What is more at stake is credibility with the wider community.

It will be interesting to see what happens when a dance is held in, say, Barbican Square.

http://www.jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20080707/cleisure/cleisure1.html