Questionable Conduct: The Jamaican Political Reality

Are some Churches unconcerned with those responsible for the May, 2010 military operation which inter alia resulted in the deaths of more than 76 persons? Are some churches primarily concerned with the state paying compensation for the damage and loss suffered by the residents of Tivoli? In a letter to the Editor, Gleaner, published Thursday, December,11, 2014, written by the Rev. Orville H. Ramocan, Director in the Office of the President, Independent Churches of Jamaica (ICJ), the position of this group  on the Tivoli Commission of Enquiry is stated: "ICJ believes that whoever was responsible for the physical violation of these poor people is irrelevant at this point in time. The reality is, the conditions and cause for these violations were created by the State. The State must now make every effort to bring healing and restoration to a community that has experienced much suffering. If this enquiry is not about helping the victims to pick up and start over with some sens

" In the end, the incursion into Tivoli played out like a well written movie script. The army surgically wrestled the community from the grasp of the criminal elements that had imprisoned its residence and had the audacity to challenge the government and by extension, the law enforcement agencies of the state." That is an excerpt from a book written by a former JDF Officer, Major Stanley P. Ford ( Ret) entitled " Core Values : A Soldier's Story" . Interestingly, the Introduction is by    Stewart Saunders Major General (Retired ) CD, JP, MSc, psc  Chief of Defence Staff  Jamaica Defence Force  21 January 2012  The view expressed by Ford must be given tremendous weight; and to some extent reflects the perspective of those in the officer corp of the JDF at the time. The then Chief of Staff would have sought the correction of any egregious error in any account of what was a catastrophic exercise. In fact Saunders reinforced the veracity of the account give

The following in the unedited version of a letter written by (Ret.) Col. Allan Douglas which was published in the Jamaica Observer, Tuesday, December 09, 2014 titled "Not too late to salvage integrity from Tivoli commission" Dear Editor, With the commencement of the Tivoli Commission of Enquiry into the shooting deaths of 76 Jamaicans by the security forces in May 2010, the Jamaican Government faces one of its biggest tests in terms of integrity, transparency, and ensuring the just and equitable administration of the law. However, early indications are that the commission could easily turn out to be a farce, and that the hopes of Jamaicans that the government will ensure a just and meaningful outcome through an impartial investigation by the Tivoli COE could end up in tatters. For the past several months, in letters to this newspaper, I have called for a fair and just investigation into the events that happened in May 2010. Along with several other Jamaicans, our ca

We are of the considered opinion that the Tivoli COE should be state-centric rather than victim-centric. By that we mean that the focus should be concentrated of the activities of agents of the state in the debacle and not the welfare of the victims. This might appear cold and indifferent to the trauma and agony resulting in the deaths of 76 or more Jamaicans allegedly at the hands of agents of the state. In support of that position we contend that the process of discerning the" truth" is probably best dealt with in three (3) distinctly different spheres:        1. There needs to be a forum in which victims and eye-witnesses  can tell their stories as how they remember it and in their own words. They would do this in groups of their peers who were in close proximity at the material time. Such would facilitate some "correction" and the filling in of blanks in the memory. This exercise would allow them to vent, receive counseling, and ultimately assist in th

The Tivoli COE has ended its first week of sittings. Some interesting observations: * Having advertised for witnesses to come forward and give statement to the Secretariat, the Chairman is faced with an unexpected flood of potential witnesses--anxious to tell their stories.  There are powerful motivational factors at work:  the extensive media coverage ;  the impression that such appearance will put their financial claims in good stead; the need to bring to public attention the trauma suffered and the hesitancy of the state in making compensation; the physical destruction remaining as a constant reminder. The Chairman is of the view that all the witnesses cannot be accommodated within the 3- month limit. Hence there is the need for an extension and supplementary budgetary allocation. *The situation is further compounded by the COE not displaying a sense of urgency. Originally, it appears that the sittings were to be spread over a longer period  but totaling some 12 weeks, Mor

Set Up Three-Month Enquiry For Tivoli - Ashley Published: Tuesday | May 14, 2013 7 Comments The following was published in The Gleaner on May 14, 2013.  We have taken the decision to post it on Dec 1, 2014 -- the commencement of the Tivoli COE . Edmond Campbell,  Senior Staff Reporter ATTORNEY-AT-LAW DR Paul Ashley is of the view that under colonial rule if "76 mongrel dawgs and a puss" had been killed, a commission of enquiry would have been promptly established, let alone 76 humans. His comments come as the Portia Simpson Miller administration mulls decisions on the terms of reference for the proposed enquiry and the selection of commissioners to carry out the task. Ashley, in a  Gleaner  interview yesterday, suggested a panel of three commissioners headed by a retired judge. The attorney wants a deadline of three months to complete the enquiry and noted that the panel should be allowed to submit an interim report befo

The Jamaica Defence Force has a duty to the people of Jamaica to publicize the truth of its operations in Tivoli Gardens in May 2010.That inconvenient truth ought not to wait on the announced Commission of Enquiry to provide a forum for its promulgation . Since May 2013 the Jamaica Defence Force (JDF) has stated categorically that the Interim Report tabled  by the Public Defender contained   "numerous unfortunate conclusions drawn on the basis of unsubstantiated allegations, misrepresentation and uninformed analyses"  The Gleaner, Monday, May 6, 2013 The JDF is a professional organisation that enjoys a special place within public confidence. It is duty-bound to maintain that position. It is imperative that  the JDF places its record in the public domain to, at the very least, provide an alternative to that posited by the public defender concerning its operations in the "Tivoli incursion/siege". Currently the public has only that Interim Report  detailing some

A showdown looms between the Jamaica Defence Force(JDF) and the Public Defender. The battle lines are drawn. The Public Defender has tabled in Parliament its Interim Report on the "Tivoli incursion/siege". That has been the subject of discussions in the local and international media, the choice topic of social media and is available on the GOJ Parliament website. The JDF has not officially responded to the adverse findings contained in Witter's Report. Indeed Earl Witter had led the public to expect a Final Report. However he has since retired and the only question is whether or not he has "packed up taken his marbles with him". The JDF has thrown down the gauntlet and signaled in no uncertain terms the approach it intends to adopt during the Tivoli Commission of Enquiry: "The JDF, meanwhile, said that it welcomed the opportunity to respond to "numerous unfortunate conclusions drawn on the basis of unsubstantiated allegations, misrepresentation

The Tivoli "incursion/siege" was a military-driven operation. That is another way of stating that The Jamaica Defence Force (JDF) played the central role in the planning and implementation of the exercise. It follows that any investigation into the armed confrontation between the civilians and members of the Security Forces must involve analysis of the veracity of the information informing the strategies which were considered,the options which were available, the factors informing the decisions taken, as well as the the nuts and bolts of the actual operation carried out.  The need for unbiased military expertise cannot be disputed. What is subject to debate is the formal role to be accorded to such skill set. Our position is that should be accorded the position of Commissioner reflecting the importance and centrality of such to the Commission of Enquiry aimed at unearthing the truth, irrespective of its inconvenience--political and otherwise. Others are of the view that suc

In an earlier post we posited Some Preliminary Concerns regarding the proposed Tivoli Commission of Enquiry. With respect to the skill set of the panel of commissioners we noted the clear need for " a foreign security expert with specialized training/ experience in intelligence gathering & analysis, surveillance, and urban armed confrontation." We argued that t he exercise in Tivoli was a military operation and no doubt the security Forces are anxious to tell how they saved Jamaica, acted with considerable restraint and in so doing prevented the escalation of fatalities. "The questioning and analysis of the operations conducted by the Security Forces in Tivoli has to be the central focus of the COE. It cannot be a public relations exercise aimed at restoring the public's confidence in the Security Forces in general and the Jamaica Defence Force in particular." We post the original letter by Colonel Allan Douglas to the Observer : an edited vers

The case for legislating the Prosecution's Right To Appeal Against An Acquittal In Criminal Cases  in Jamaica has been ventilated in a document emanating from the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.Like any other case, the arguments presented have to be assessed before any conclusion can be made concerning the desirability,and/or appropriateness  of such in our judicial system. In a letter entitled "Prosecution Deserves Right To Appeal" published in The Gleaner, Saturday, April 19, 2014 Glenn Tucker states, inter alia, "asymmetry twists the criminal procedure towards the interest of defendants".  For what it is worth, that argument is hinged on two questionable predispositions: (a) the DPP's concern stems from the fact that the judge could make a error in law and where that exists, the matter should be revisited; and (b) there should be freedom from bias against both the defendant and the prosecution. Let us examine briefly the position of

The right of appeal by the prosecution against an acquittal in criminal cases has been placed once again on the front burner of public discussion by the learned DPP, Paula Llewellyn QC in the aftermath of the Kern Spencer acquittal in the "Cuban Lightbulb Trial". The DPP has not shirked from declaring publicly that the Senior Resident Magistrate made "an error in law" by upholding the no- case submissions. In a document dated October 7, 2013 the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions put out its case for the Parliament to legislate such a right.. It is a very detailed document citing legal cases in support and giving quotations from eminent juris. To those unschooled in the law, this is heavy stuff--liberally infused with an overabundance of legalese. In this post we attempt to faithfully summarize some of  the main positions enunciated. We do so without indulging at this time in any assessment of whether the prosecution in Jamaica "deserves" s

The GOJ has announced a budget of $100m for the Tivoli Commission of Enquiry; in addition to identifying a replacement for Velma Hylton QC. However, whilst the the candidate's name has been forwarded to the Leader of the Opposition in the "consultation ritual", there is still no indication of the proposed start up date. Of course it will be argued that such will depend, in part, on the availability of the Commissioners, the supporting staff, as well as the outstanding ballistics report - which its is said to have bedeviled the now retired Public Defender. Interesting the tension between the Office of the Public Defender and the Independent Commission of Investigation (INDECOM) as to the apportionment of blame for the delay seemed to be resolved with the former (probably as a departing gift) sending copies of some 42 files to the latter (without the public being given any reasons). These constitute the set that-- in the view of the Public Defender after analysing the

The Resident Magistrate Court is not a court of record i.e. there is no court stenographer recording verbatim the proceedings of the trial. In case of an appeal, reliance is placed on the notes compiled by the sitting Resident Magistrate. Not having access to the RM's notes, resort has to be made by that recorded by one or both parties. Below is the "transcribed verbatim by a member of the prosecution's team". We have no way of attesting to the veracity of such ; and its posting is primarily to complete the picture--having published both No Case Submissions and the Crown's Response. R v Kern Spencer and Coleen Wright Ruling of   on Application for Permanent Stay of Proceedings and No Case Submission Her Honour Ms. Judith Pusey states: “No case submission was made by the defence and an application for the stay of the proceedings on the basis of delay and prosecutorial misconduct. The credibility of Rodney Chin was put in issue. In this case th

The following is the Crown's Response to the No Case Submissions (NCS) made on behalf of Kern Spencer  and Coleen Wright: SKELETON RESPONSE TO NO CASE SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF KERN SPENCER AND COLEEN WRIGHT FOR BREACHES OF THE PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT AND THE CORRUPTION PREVENTION ACT 1. The prosecution submits that the Crown has proven all the elements relative to the charges brought against the accused for Breaches of the Corruption Prevention Act and the Proceeds of Crime Act. 2. It is our further submission that at this stage all that is required for the prosecution to establish is a prima facie case against the accused in relation to the charges. 3. Questions relative to the credibility or reliability of any of the witnesses called by the Crown are questions of fact for the tribunal of fact to determine at the end of the case. CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE   4. The Crown has sought to establish the case against the accused in this case through d