THE excitement generated by the capture and subsequent extradition of Mr Christopher Coke and the related legal complications now facing the Rev Al Miller understandably pushed other topical issues into the background.

Yet last week’s passage of the long-awaited six crime bills and the expected extension of the State of Emergency for another 30 days – and also to include St Catherine alongside Kingston and St Andrew as the areas covered – are of paramount importance.

Given the build-up to last Tuesday’s debate, it seemed reasonable to expect that the Opposition People’s National Party (PNP) was set to take a very forceful position in opposition to the passage of the bills because of perceived violations of basic rights.

As it turned out the bills – an act to amend the Bail Act; an act to make interim provision extending the powers of arrest and detention under Sections 50B and 50F of the Constabulary Force 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; and an act to make interim provision in relation to the grant of bail in specified circumstances — were pushed through with relative ease by the Government side.

When it came down to voting time, the Opposition actually gave its support to the interim provision extending the powers of arrest. Given that the PNP commands 28 of the 60 seats in the elected House of Representatives, there were surprisingly only 10 votes opposing the other bills while the Government side counted 28 in favour. In other words, for whatever reason, most Opposition MPs made themselves unavailable at voting time – an indication that at best, they felt less than strongly about their party’s stance.

Of note, two Opposition legislators abstained. In the context of accepted parliamentary language those abstentions seem suspiciously like ‘yes’ votes.

In the circumstances, the seeming ambivalence of the parliamentary opposition is entirely understandable. The truth is that the overwhelming bias of the Jamaican population at this time is that everything that can be done must be done, to bring criminals to heel. There is a growing feeling that the society is at war with criminals. In times of war, extraordinary action by the State becomes tolerable.

Hence the positive public response to the extension of the State of Emergency, which has received Opposition support.

Available evidence suggests that crime has dipped substantially since emergency powers were first handed to the army and police in May.

However, Jamaicans need to understand that the State of Emergency and indeed other measures such as the extension of powers of arrest can only be temporary. They cannot be long-term or sustained solutions to criminal activity. Soon, the extraordinary powers now accorded the security forces will have to be removed.

A major challenge going forward will be to ensure that the security forces are suitably equipped, both in terms of personnel and material resources, to deal with criminals who may now be in retreat in some areas but are by no means defeated. The even greater challenge will be for the State to locate the resources and political will to take its rightful place in communities that have long looked to dons and crime lords for support and protection.

And as we have said in this space before, ordinary Jamaicans living their normal, everyday lives must also realise that they, too, have important roles to play. They and their neighbours need to so organise themselves lawfully and in collaboration with the police and other agencies of the State, that criminals, terrorists and parasites are left with no place to go.

Ultimately, the job of fighting crime cannot be left to the security forces alone.