THE Jamaican Parliament last Tuesday sat under tightened security provided by significantly more lawmen, who were armed and vigilant.
The somewhat glum atmosphere was a stark reminder of the joint police/military operation launched in neighbouring Tivoli Gardens and surrounding areas on Monday as the security forces stormed the areas hoping to bring in West Kingston gangster Christopher ‘Dudus’ Coke, who is the subject of a United States extradition request.
In the violent exchanges that ensued, more than 70 civilians were confirmed dead, including two members of the Jamaica Constabulary Force and one member of the Jamaica Defence Force. A number of injuries were reported, security and civilian alike.
Outside Gordon House, numerous spent shell casings littered the entrance to Gordon House, leftover evidence from an early morning gun battle between police and criminal elements, security personnel told the Sunday Observer.
It was in this atmosphere that Prime Minister Bruce Golding announced that debate on the six anti-crime bills are to begin this week, the hope being to have them passed into law before Parliament’s summer break sometime in July.
The six crime bills — an act to amend the Bail Act; an act to further amend the Firearms Act; an act to amend the Offences Against the Person Act; an act to amend the Parole Act; an act to make interim provision in relation to the grant of bail in specified circumstances; and an act to make interim provision extending the powers of arrest and detention under Sections 50B and 50F of the Constabulary Force Act — were placed before a Joint Select Committee of Parliament in 2008. However, when the committee completed its consultations after hearing submissions from several stakeholders and other members of the society four months later, there was no consensus on the measures.
Just this March, attorney general and Justice Minister Senator Dorothy Lightbourne said the bills, which were lacking in some respects, were being redrafted. She at the time indicated that the lack of co-operation by the parliamentary Opposition was responsible for the delay in passage — a claim which that party has rejected.
Making his contribution to the 2010/11 Sectoral Debates at Gordon House in Kingston earlier this month, Opposition spokesperson on national security Peter Bunting said the Opposition has consistently co-operated with the Government in the area of national security since September 2007 when that administration took office.
He said the Opposition agreed in principle at the “Vale Royal Talks” that some broad legislative measures were necessary to assist law enforcement but said the actual legislation that was subsequently developed by the Government was presented to Parliament without input from the Opposition.
“It became clear that there were some specific and extreme features in the bills, such as an absolute prohibition on bail for 60 days for a wide variety of offences and long mandatory minimum sentences, with no provision whatsoever for the court to have any discretion on those matters… was manifestly inappropriate and oppressive,” he said at the time.
According to Bunting, those provisions would deny citizens of even minimal judicial protection from abuses of power by state agents. In addition, he said two of the bills were being passed by a procedure which would prevent the court from considering whether those bills were compatible with the fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed by the constitution.
On Tuesday, Prime Minister Bruce Golding said the Government had taken note of the concerns which were expressed by the Opposition in relation to the two bills.
“Those were the two bills that we were seeking to secure passage under section 50 of the constitution. We have sought to address those concerns it is yet to be seen whether or not they will satisfy all of the persons who raised those concerns. I will certainly want to share with the Opposition spokesman on national security the proposed changes to those bills,” he said. “I’m hoping we can before the summer break take the crime bills and have them brought into law well before the summer break.”
In the meantime, the prime minister said the proposed anti-gang legislation is not yet in draft form and as such a timeline could not be promised.
“Cabinet only authorised it this morning and issued drafting instructions. It is a challenging piece of legislation on two counts. Firstly we are breaking new grounds, but we are not inventing the wheel; we are able to draw on similar legislation that exists in comparable jurisdictions. We are going to have to get that bill drafted, take it through all of the technical stages and get it here. I would prefer not to give a finite timeline on that until we get the drafting process underway,” he told Parliament.
Be the first to comment