KINGSTON, Jamaica — Opposition Spokesman on industry, investment and commerce Anthony Hylton, is demanding that the Government explains its decision to suspend the export of copper, as well as increase the fines levied against people found in breach of the order.

Hylton, in a release today, called on Minister of Industry, Commerce, Agriculture and Fisheries (MICAF) Karl Samuda to provide greater clarity on the basis for what “appears to be his draconian and precipitous action in instructing the closure of copper exports from Jamaica.”

The Government announced the ban on copper export last Thursday.

The Opposition spokesman said he views the minister’s action with curiosity, given the fact that the new regime governing export of scrap metal, placed copper exports on a restricted list requiring a special permit.

He said that this specifically requires the minister’s approval after sufficient due diligence on the part of the several agencies involved, including a certificate from the Factories Corporation of Jamaica.

The ministry in announcing the closure of copper exports said the move is intended to discourage the theft of copper cables from utility companies.

Samuda said the export of any material made of copper without the permission of the ministry is prohibited under the Trade Scrap Metal Regulation 2013, and no such permission will be given in the future.

The minister also issued an order increasing the fine payable for people who are found in breach of the regulations. The maximum fine payable upon conviction for breaches of the regulations has been increased to $3 million, up from $2 million.

The maximum prison term of two years remains unchanged.

Meanwhile, the Opposition spokesman today posed the following questions, which he said was in the interest of full transparency:

1) Is the ban on copper export, a total ban covering all exporters of copper or just some?

2) If all, how are the Industrial exporters being treated under the ban and what is the rationale for this treatment?

3) If some, which exporters does the ban cover?  What is the rationale for their inclusion?

4) Is there specific evidence against any or all exporters?  If so, what is the nature of the evidence indicating a breach of the regulations and have charges been laid against the specific exporters?

5) How long is the ban intended to last?

6) What specific measure(s) is/are intended to be put in place during the closure of the export?

7) Are any of the Internet providers, themselves exporters of copper? If yes, which ones?

8) If yes, are they covered by the ban?

9) Is this the least trade restrictive measure that could have been taken in the circumstance?

“We have to be careful in the exercise of this authority where, as here, significant investments in the setting up of facilities and the purchase of goods legitimately for the export trade have been made by large, medium and small enterprises,” Hylton argued.  

He said the abrupt closure of their businesses without the opportunity for consultation could impose severe hardship and must only be done under the direst circumstance.

“We need to be sure that such circumstance exists and that the minister’s response is non-discriminatory and proportional,” the Opposition spokesman ended.