Tweet
Means and end of policing - autocracy or democracy?
The Farquharson Forum
A guest column by Yvonne McCalla Sobers
Sunday, January 28, 2007
Alarming murder figures at the start of 2007 have brought renewed challenge to Jamaica's style of policing. In the first week, five policemen were injured and three killed; in the first two weeks, about 60 civilians were murdered.
Influential individuals and groups have expressed outrage at this peak in violent crime, and the government is once more trying to determine policing measures that will enable the public to feel safe. In the context of murder figures that dipped by 20 per cent in 2006, the Jamaica Observer editorial on January 8 2007 stated:
Tamara Scott-Williams
"There must be consistent, coherent strategies to combat crime and to support the security forces. It has been a weakness of Jamaican governance down the years that priority, with the appropriate weight and speed, is all too often not placed in the correct place."
AUTOCRATIC POLICING
Modern Jamaican concepts of policing were derived from the panic of the white planter class following the 1865 uprising of blacks in St Thomas. Seemingly trapped in an autocratic policing style, successive Jamaican Governments have sought to meet violence with greater violence accompanied by greater breaches of civil liberties. Some of Jamaica's most draconian legislation was passed almost 35 years ago in the wake of public alarm when the murder rate had risen to about 10 in every 100,000 persons.
Today, Jamaica's murder rate ranges between the 30s and the 60s in every 100,000, and remains among the top three highest in the world. Below is a table showing the fluctuation in Jamaica's murder rate since independence.
The murder rate in 2007 (a possible election year) is likely to be similar to the 2004 rate, if the trend continues as it has begun in January.
CONTROL VS SERVICE AND PROTECTION
An autocratic style of policing, focused on securing the interests of the dominant group, has remained a Jamaican norm, despite post-independence expectations of democratic governance. Actions of the police continue to send messages of control rather than service or protection. Despite a few scattered pockets of what is termed community policing, Jamaican police seem barely answerable to the police hierarchy.
They are certainly not answerable to the people. Policing without the people's consent has had the effect of alienating sectors of the population where the people's cooperation could be most beneficial in solving crime.
Citizens have tended to respond to autocratic policing by mistrusting the formal systems and refusing to give information to the police. Further, in some affluent communities private security firms carry out policing functions; in some poorer communities, criminal gangs have become the accepted protectors who are in turn protected by the communities' silence.
Not surprisingly therefore, the clear-up rate of crime is about 40 per cent, and wrong-doers commit crimes with a high probability of impunity. Significantly also, 'cleared up' indicates that someone was accused and perhaps charged by the police, but provides no sense about a rate of convictions.
Reliance on autocratic policing has tended to give prominence to police officers with a homicidal history. Indeed, police officers can become folk heroes, based on their participation in homicides. In a context in which summary executions can be considered as just punishment for alleged crimes, data show that a policeman has a one in 1000 likelihood of being convicted for killing a civilian. Further, the number of civilians killed by the police has increased in the past two years, from about 130 in 2004 to about 240 in 2006.
POLICE THEMSELVES
ADVERSELY AFFECTED
The police themselves can be adversely affected by autocratic policing. Police with too much power and too little accountability have been shown to be prone to corruption. A January 2007 poll showed that Jamaicans believe over half of the police force is corrupt.
Anxiety to control a community presumed to be uncooperative can contribute to inappropriate decisions born of stress or corrupt decisions born of greed.
Policemen may find themselves pitted against communities identical or comparable to those in which they were raised. In addition, policemen may be demoralised by seeing suspects walk free because civilians have refused to provide the information needed to solve crime and support conviction. If the police have no internal democracy in their organization, their day-to-day needs - such as salary, transportation, upward mobility, salary and conditions of employment and, most of all, personal protection from harm - may not be satisfied.
Nonetheless, failure of the autocratic approach seems to have inspired attempts to apply the same approach with increased vigour. As recently as January 12, 2007, Prime Minister Portia Simpson reportedly called for an all-out assault on those who continue to engage in criminal activities.
DEMOCRATIC POLICING
Jamaica is considered as having a democratic government by the people through their elected representatives. Citizens experience the quality of their democracy not just when they cast their votes, but every time they interact with a government agency. The actions of the police therefore provide a quick yardstick for assessing democracy: a policing entity has far greater power over the lives and freedoms of civilians than, for example, health or education agencies.
REQUIREMENTS OF 'DEMOCRATIC POLICING'
Democratic policing requires systemic change from the autocratic and militaristic origins of what is still called the Jamaica Constabulary Force (not service). Democratic policing incorporates community policing - the delivery of quality service to communities, consistent with the community's needs - but goes far beyond it.
The systemic change required to institutionalize democratic policing in Jamaica would include ensuring by actions and not merely words.
These are some of the factors to be considered:
Neutrality in enforcing the law. Judicial sanctions would be required for stringent police actions, such as fingerprinting, photographing, search and seizure, arrest without charge, use of technology to invade privacy, or use of instruments of violence to maim and kill.
Emphasis on service rather than force. Combat tactics used by the police against sectors of the society, if required, would be considered as short-term measures carried out in strict accordance with the law.
Impartiality. Individuals and groups in any geographical location, of any economic standing, and of any political leaning, would be assured of even-handed treatment.
Accountability. The police would understand themselves to be answerable to the public and not to the regime in power. Police would therefore be subject to justice, rather than appear to be shielded from justice for human rights infringements.
Transparency. Policing activities would be subject to credible internal and external investigating and reporting to the public.
Protection. The primary task of the police would be keeping peace and ensuring safety.
Balance between order and liberty. Police would be neither so restrained as to be ineffective, or so unrestrained as appear to be operating as agents of a police state.
Fair treatment of the police. Police persons would be equipped with the requisite skills, resources and equipment for their own safety and would be provided with conditions of service that would lead to effective performance of their duties.
A WAY AHEAD
Jamaica's history since independence shows that autocratic policing has provided neither control of crime nor protection from crime. Democratic policing, or at least policing consistent with democratic aspirations, could well be the way ahead if Jamaica is once again to become a peaceful country in which to live.
The views expressed in this article are not necessarily the views of the Farquharson Institute.
For queries, comments or membership information please contact us either at 5 Lyncourt, Kingston 8 or
A response from a reader.
The problem of crime in Jamaica, both its level and often senselessness, has both wearied and beaten down a traumatized society. The consequence is that with our heads so bloodied and bowed we scarcely look up at the panaceas offered or the various plans proposed.
Our dearest wish is that there could be some end to this long nightmare.
This does not mean, however, that we are unaware of the reasons for the continuing high levels of violent crime in particular, or that we do not know the areas that are more crime prone than others. In fact, this phenomenon of senseless and violent crime, which is of major concern, is not restricted to any particular geographical area in the island.
What seems to us to be sadly lacking in the fight against criminal activities by the authorities responsible is a sensible programme. Ever so often "a new plan" is provided and released with some amount of fanfare; the result is virtually the same as the "plan" that went before. Short of a change in method, the only plan seems to be one of decimating the criminal population, and they are easily and quickly replaceable.
We have no comprehensive plan. Neither are we proactive in our responses.
On top of all this, we are faced with the problem of many members of the Jamaica Constabulary Force are suspected of being corrupt and inefficient.
While we are in the turmoil Deputy Commissioner Mark Shields is proposing that a survey on crime be undertaken. Efforts undertaken in 2006 have borne commendable fruit.
Whilst we realise that there is both bureaucratic and academic interest in such a survey, we offer the suggestion that it does not seem like a priority at this time. It is like, in the midst of a war, someone calls for a study of why the war is being waged. A survey on crime is like a survey on poverty; both stir our interests but do not solve the practical and immediate problem.
As Deputy Commissioner Shields himself has said, a survey on crime is an expensive proposition; not only financially, but in terms of time and other resources which could, perhaps, be better spent in intelligence gathering and a proactive effort to get to grips with the situation.
We think that it is time we had a proactive Constabulary Force that uses gathered intelligence to upstage the criminal elements in our society rather than wait until they have wreaked mayhem to respond to them.
What say you?
Talk Back
No comments have been posted
The Farquharson Forum
A guest column by Yvonne McCalla Sobers
Sunday, January 28, 2007
Alarming murder figures at the start of 2007 have brought renewed challenge to Jamaica's style of policing. In the first week, five policemen were injured and three killed; in the first two weeks, about 60 civilians were murdered.
Influential individuals and groups have expressed outrage at this peak in violent crime, and the government is once more trying to determine policing measures that will enable the public to feel safe. In the context of murder figures that dipped by 20 per cent in 2006, the Jamaica Observer editorial on January 8 2007 stated:
Tamara Scott-Williams
"There must be consistent, coherent strategies to combat crime and to support the security forces. It has been a weakness of Jamaican governance down the years that priority, with the appropriate weight and speed, is all too often not placed in the correct place."
AUTOCRATIC POLICING
Modern Jamaican concepts of policing were derived from the panic of the white planter class following the 1865 uprising of blacks in St Thomas. Seemingly trapped in an autocratic policing style, successive Jamaican Governments have sought to meet violence with greater violence accompanied by greater breaches of civil liberties. Some of Jamaica's most draconian legislation was passed almost 35 years ago in the wake of public alarm when the murder rate had risen to about 10 in every 100,000 persons.
Today, Jamaica's murder rate ranges between the 30s and the 60s in every 100,000, and remains among the top three highest in the world. Below is a table showing the fluctuation in Jamaica's murder rate since independence.
The murder rate in 2007 (a possible election year) is likely to be similar to the 2004 rate, if the trend continues as it has begun in January.
CONTROL VS SERVICE AND PROTECTION
An autocratic style of policing, focused on securing the interests of the dominant group, has remained a Jamaican norm, despite post-independence expectations of democratic governance. Actions of the police continue to send messages of control rather than service or protection. Despite a few scattered pockets of what is termed community policing, Jamaican police seem barely answerable to the police hierarchy.
They are certainly not answerable to the people. Policing without the people's consent has had the effect of alienating sectors of the population where the people's cooperation could be most beneficial in solving crime.
Citizens have tended to respond to autocratic policing by mistrusting the formal systems and refusing to give information to the police. Further, in some affluent communities private security firms carry out policing functions; in some poorer communities, criminal gangs have become the accepted protectors who are in turn protected by the communities' silence.
Not surprisingly therefore, the clear-up rate of crime is about 40 per cent, and wrong-doers commit crimes with a high probability of impunity. Significantly also, 'cleared up' indicates that someone was accused and perhaps charged by the police, but provides no sense about a rate of convictions.
Reliance on autocratic policing has tended to give prominence to police officers with a homicidal history. Indeed, police officers can become folk heroes, based on their participation in homicides. In a context in which summary executions can be considered as just punishment for alleged crimes, data show that a policeman has a one in 1000 likelihood of being convicted for killing a civilian. Further, the number of civilians killed by the police has increased in the past two years, from about 130 in 2004 to about 240 in 2006.
POLICE THEMSELVES
ADVERSELY AFFECTED
The police themselves can be adversely affected by autocratic policing. Police with too much power and too little accountability have been shown to be prone to corruption. A January 2007 poll showed that Jamaicans believe over half of the police force is corrupt.
Anxiety to control a community presumed to be uncooperative can contribute to inappropriate decisions born of stress or corrupt decisions born of greed.
Policemen may find themselves pitted against communities identical or comparable to those in which they were raised. In addition, policemen may be demoralised by seeing suspects walk free because civilians have refused to provide the information needed to solve crime and support conviction. If the police have no internal democracy in their organization, their day-to-day needs - such as salary, transportation, upward mobility, salary and conditions of employment and, most of all, personal protection from harm - may not be satisfied.
Nonetheless, failure of the autocratic approach seems to have inspired attempts to apply the same approach with increased vigour. As recently as January 12, 2007, Prime Minister Portia Simpson reportedly called for an all-out assault on those who continue to engage in criminal activities.
DEMOCRATIC POLICING
Jamaica is considered as having a democratic government by the people through their elected representatives. Citizens experience the quality of their democracy not just when they cast their votes, but every time they interact with a government agency. The actions of the police therefore provide a quick yardstick for assessing democracy: a policing entity has far greater power over the lives and freedoms of civilians than, for example, health or education agencies.
REQUIREMENTS OF 'DEMOCRATIC POLICING'
Democratic policing requires systemic change from the autocratic and militaristic origins of what is still called the Jamaica Constabulary Force (not service). Democratic policing incorporates community policing - the delivery of quality service to communities, consistent with the community's needs - but goes far beyond it.
The systemic change required to institutionalize democratic policing in Jamaica would include ensuring by actions and not merely words.
These are some of the factors to be considered:
Neutrality in enforcing the law. Judicial sanctions would be required for stringent police actions, such as fingerprinting, photographing, search and seizure, arrest without charge, use of technology to invade privacy, or use of instruments of violence to maim and kill.
Emphasis on service rather than force. Combat tactics used by the police against sectors of the society, if required, would be considered as short-term measures carried out in strict accordance with the law.
Impartiality. Individuals and groups in any geographical location, of any economic standing, and of any political leaning, would be assured of even-handed treatment.
Accountability. The police would understand themselves to be answerable to the public and not to the regime in power. Police would therefore be subject to justice, rather than appear to be shielded from justice for human rights infringements.
Transparency. Policing activities would be subject to credible internal and external investigating and reporting to the public.
Protection. The primary task of the police would be keeping peace and ensuring safety.
Balance between order and liberty. Police would be neither so restrained as to be ineffective, or so unrestrained as appear to be operating as agents of a police state.
Fair treatment of the police. Police persons would be equipped with the requisite skills, resources and equipment for their own safety and would be provided with conditions of service that would lead to effective performance of their duties.
A WAY AHEAD
Jamaica's history since independence shows that autocratic policing has provided neither control of crime nor protection from crime. Democratic policing, or at least policing consistent with democratic aspirations, could well be the way ahead if Jamaica is once again to become a peaceful country in which to live.
The views expressed in this article are not necessarily the views of the Farquharson Institute.
For queries, comments or membership information please contact us either at 5 Lyncourt, Kingston 8 or
A response from a reader.
The problem of crime in Jamaica, both its level and often senselessness, has both wearied and beaten down a traumatized society. The consequence is that with our heads so bloodied and bowed we scarcely look up at the panaceas offered or the various plans proposed.
Our dearest wish is that there could be some end to this long nightmare.
This does not mean, however, that we are unaware of the reasons for the continuing high levels of violent crime in particular, or that we do not know the areas that are more crime prone than others. In fact, this phenomenon of senseless and violent crime, which is of major concern, is not restricted to any particular geographical area in the island.
What seems to us to be sadly lacking in the fight against criminal activities by the authorities responsible is a sensible programme. Ever so often "a new plan" is provided and released with some amount of fanfare; the result is virtually the same as the "plan" that went before. Short of a change in method, the only plan seems to be one of decimating the criminal population, and they are easily and quickly replaceable.
We have no comprehensive plan. Neither are we proactive in our responses.
On top of all this, we are faced with the problem of many members of the Jamaica Constabulary Force are suspected of being corrupt and inefficient.
While we are in the turmoil Deputy Commissioner Mark Shields is proposing that a survey on crime be undertaken. Efforts undertaken in 2006 have borne commendable fruit.
Whilst we realise that there is both bureaucratic and academic interest in such a survey, we offer the suggestion that it does not seem like a priority at this time. It is like, in the midst of a war, someone calls for a study of why the war is being waged. A survey on crime is like a survey on poverty; both stir our interests but do not solve the practical and immediate problem.
As Deputy Commissioner Shields himself has said, a survey on crime is an expensive proposition; not only financially, but in terms of time and other resources which could, perhaps, be better spent in intelligence gathering and a proactive effort to get to grips with the situation.
We think that it is time we had a proactive Constabulary Force that uses gathered intelligence to upstage the criminal elements in our society rather than wait until they have wreaked mayhem to respond to them.
What say you?
Talk Back
No comments have been posted
Comment