A few Saturdays ago, I went to the Montego Bay Market shortly after 6:00 am, as customary, before the crowd descends and parking becomes an impossibility. While walking through the market, I was approached by a mature woman who called me by name and gave me a hug. I did not recognise her, but it appeared to me that she belonged to one of the congregations within my jurisdiction. As she hugged me, she whispered in a subdued tone, “Bishop, be careful how you move about in the market. Within the last few days they held up a Chinese man who was doing his shopping near this very spot and robbed him of all his money in full view of all the people, and not a soul did anything to help him.” She released me after issuing the warning and offered a gracious wish for a good day.

Her message and her method suddenly made a lot of sense to me because of the hushed tones in which some vendors were speaking to each other as they unloaded their goods before customers arrived. During a conversation between two vendors I overheard one saying to the other, “Mi granddaughter worried that dem may come and kill mi.” Not far away another vendor was overheard saying, “Not the fat one, yuh never see the tall, slim tiefin’ bwoy when him approach”, or something to that effect. The threads were coming together for me that morning as I heard the exchanges which spoke of crime and violence, and the fear which the criminals have generated, making communal conversation reduced to mere hushed tones.

I could not help but think that what was transpiring in the market could be considered a microcosm of the Jamaican society today. There was a time when such occurrences were confined to inner-city communities under the control of dons and area leaders, but now the tentacles have spread throughout the island and all levels of society have been infected. Criminals, armed with guns, operating alone or in gangs, and characterised by a seeming thirst for inflicting unwarranted and unconscionable violence and suffering on their victims, have driven the fear of hell into the population. Additionally, due to the pervasive level of corruption in the society and the consequent lack of trust, persons are retreating further into silence as they never know who is implicated or who will bring back information shared to the perpetrators of crime.

The extradition case involving Christopher “Dudus” Coke is now a prime example of this dynamic. The case came to public attention after a court in Florida announced his indictment and the request for his extradition many months ago. I was at the time alarmed by the manner of this revelation by United States authorities, as I felt that if the two governments were to have a meaningful and mutually respectful approach to the handling of such matters, then there ought to be more government-to-government dialogue outside of the public arena. Alas, the nation has now been told by former Minister of National Security and Justice Peter Phillips that the discussions on this case between both governments actually began before the PNP Administration left office.

Once information concerning this extradition request was made public, there was a sense of intrigue, mystery and silence which shrouded the case. The media carried the headlines, but unlike similar cases, there was only guarded discussion of the case in the public arena. In hushed tones persons began to speak of how Kingston would be burnt to the ground if such a thing were to transpire. As time dragged on, public figures and journalists who often speak on matters of interest were guarded in their comments in public while whispering over cocktails concerning this matter.

When a journalist and a media house publicised comments concerning the case, which raised serious questions about the Government’s handling of the situation and advocated decisive action in advancing the extradition proceedings, what followed were reports of threats of reprisal attacks based on what the police claimed were credible reports. The general secretary of the ruling Jamaica Labour Party was quick to question the veracity of such reports, but the damage had already been done and the message received: “Retreat in fear and silence is the safest way to go.” It would be unfounded to suggest that there was any direct connection between Christopher Coke as an individual and what had transpired, but the ongoing negative perception and reputation of Tivoli Gardens came into play and coloured the responses of some persons from the very outset.

Things died down for a while and even the questions raised by the Opposition in Parliament received answers that were not very forthcoming. The pronouncements from government spokespersons have been treated by many as lacking in credibility and not sufficiently enlightening because of a perception that the approach is too politically coloured. This kind of climate only becomes a breeding ground for rumours and conjectures.

Then came that statement from Julissa Reynoso, deputy assistant secretary for Central America and the Caribbean at the US Department of State, that Christopher “Dudus” Coke is still “a person of very high interest” and is still wanted to answer drug trafficking charges as soon as possible. This had the effect of turning up the volume on the public discussion of the issue, and more persons began to venture into the public arena with greater self-disclosure. It was made clear that the United States Government was not buying the explanations which the Jamaican Government had given to citizens concerning the nature of the extradition request, and that the fear and guarded tones in which some people spoke of the issue in Jamaica did not have the power to intimidate as far as they were concerned.

The State Department has spoken in no uncertain terms in its recently released annual International Narcotics Control Strategy Report in which it made pointed criticisms of the Bruce Golding-led administration for its handling of the extradition request for Christopher “Dudus” Coke. In fact, it went further by questioning Jamaica’s commitment to the fight against narco-trafficking. In this lies a significant movement from the criticism of a leader to the indictment of a whole nation.

What has in effect happened is that it has taken the United States Government for us to show some guts to be able to enter into this conversation with openness and passion, without fear of reprisal. There are countless voices of every social group in the society articulating a position, and the airwaves are clogged with ordinary Jamaicans who now feel the freedom to express their opinion on the issue. Perhaps we may learn something from this development concerning the way in which our society is organised and how our political process can be less than liberating for our own citizens.

What then is being said since we no longer seem to have to speak in hushed tones? It is clear that the Government of Jamaica does not enjoy the confidence of its citizenry in its handling of this extradition request. Extradition requests are nothing new to the Jamaican landscape, but what is new is the partisan political profile of the person at the centre of this request. In this regard, while it is true that in matters of national importance the buck stops with the prime minister, in this particular situation the prime minister needs to recognise a conflict of interest, as there are personal political interests for him at stake in more ways than one. Additionally, the State Department of the United States Government has made it clear that it is not just a case of the prime minister being chastised for his handling of the situation, but that there are implications for how we are perceived as a people who have institutionalised corruption and that unspecified consequences will no doubt follow. It hardly matters then if the prime minister uses language suggesting that he is prepared to be the sacrificial lamb, because the truth is that it is the whole flock that is likely to be slaughtered by his seeming altruistic motivation.

It seems clear that this extradition request cannot remain stalled, and that some significant steps forward will need to be taken. In this regard, I support the position of those who argue that the approach being articulated by the Government in defence of their lack of action is one that is politically shaped and the issues have at heart legal interpretations which are best handled in the judicial system, whether we are dealing with the way in which evidence was gathered, the violation of constitutional rights, or breaches in the extradition convention. In these matters I would advise the prime minister to speak in hushed tones, not out of fear, but out of respect for the collective mind of this nation, the cause of justice, and protection of the well-being of the nation.