One of the most significant developments of modern society is the field of technology. It has contributed in significant ways to the transformation of the landscape of contemporary society through the ease of communication and the flow of information which have become possible through the use of the electronic media, the computer, the Internet and its derivatives, and cable television, among other devices.

There has been a kind of unspoken assumption that technology speaks of advancement and is value-neutral as it serves this end. Unfortunately, human society is learning day by day that technology, like every human development, is not value-neutral and can be put to all sorts of unintended uses through the operation of the distorted minds of human beings.

Those of us who have direct connections with secondary and tertiary level educational institutions have had to devise all kinds of courses and strategies to educate the students concerning the positive and responsible uses of technology, and the dangers and pitfalls when this is used in irresponsible and careless fashion. This has come about because of the naïve and indiscreet postings of personal data and compromising pictures of themselves on Facebook and Myspace.

In addition, the technology allows persons to eavesdrop or pursue their voyeuristic interests by staging or taking candid photographs of the unsuspecting and then posting these on the Internet. Perhaps the most famous of recent times being the college student who committed suicide after his roommate shot a secret video of him sharing sexual intimacy with another man, and then posting this on the Internet for public consumption.

Additionally, political leaders all over the globe have been introducing legislation to allow them to use technology in ways that are invasive and leave citizens with little privacy concerning their personal affairs and even their physical person. So government computers are able to track all our electronic messages, monitor our financial transactions, monitor our movement on the streets in ways that do not allow even for the private and indiscreet scratching of our body parts, and take images of our body parts without our ability to resist. All of this is explained in terms of serving the interest of the common good.

Now it seems that the shoe is on the other foot, and the politicians and government officials now have technology invading and exposing a world which, up to this point, has been treated as privileged and confidential. Along comes an organisation called WikiLeaks which defines its purpose in the following terms: “We are of assistance to peoples of all countries who wish to reveal unethical behaviour in their governments and institutions. We aim for maximum political impact.”

A non-profit organisation founded by Julian Assange, it has created a maelstrom of reaction from governments and institutions across the world as it has taken into the public arena unethical activities by politicians, governments, and public and private institutions. Now that these activities have come to light, the founder is facing a multiplicity of legal battles from various “exposed sources” who would like to have a “blackout” on the WikiLeaks channel of communication worldwide.

Here in Jamaica, those WikiLeaks have served to make public the actions of political leaders at the highest level and the activities and assessments of the United States Government and her operatives in Jamaica. In light of these exposures we have seen professions of memory lapses and an unwillingness to comment on the issues on the premise that it would be a long, tedious, and pointless exercise on the part of our political leaders, while the United States Embassy has played the usual card in saying that it does not comment on certain matters.

Commenting on the latter response, I would simply say that for those whose lives are guided by naivety concerning the operation of diplomatic presence in our country, believing that it is simply about reciprocal hospitality, this should serve as a rude awakening. In the case of local political officials, it points to the fact that the supposed veil of secrecy and confidentiality which had offered cover from public light has been blown away.

It is undeniable that there has to be a place for confidentiality in the conduct of government, especially as it relates to transactions and negotiations which are currently underway and which could be unduly influenced by the disclosure of such information. Likewise, it may also be necessary to have confidentiality preserved in order to protect the identities of persons who may be on legitimate assignments by their government and whose identity, if disclosed, could put lives at risk. This is not what I understand WikiLeaks to be about. Its concern is with unethical behaviour on the part of public officials and governments globally.

In an era of access to information and whistle-blowing legislation which are designed to promote transparency, eliminate corruption, and promote social justice, it is inconceivable that politicians and governments who have been duly elected by a democratic process should understand their leadership in such a way that it does not involve accountability for unethical behaviour committed during the exercise of the public office.

Barring the provisos which I have expressed above, it could only augur well for the democratic process of governance if our elected officials know that transactions and decisions would be subject to public disclosure. I would suggest that we pay close attention to the political leaders, institutions, and governments who are leading the charge to have Julian Assange prosecuted and imprisoned and the WikiLeaks organisation shut down.

It cannot be that while our elected officials and governments are prepared to legislate their right to violate our privacy and our person in the national interest, they are not prepared to be subject to similar standards when it comes to their accountability for the conduct of the nation’s business.

Perspective on the New Year

Various contributors to this and other publications have offered their assessment of the year that has passed and have given expression to their wish list for 2011. I shall take the route that seems rather simplistic and express one wish for 2011 and which focuses on the leadership that is offered by elected officials and those in the public service.

Most of us have had the experience of going into an organisation to transact business and run into a customer service representative who gives us the most silly explanation as to why we cannot complete the desired transaction, or explains to us a process that is clearly designed to frustrate and to delay any effective action, and which then leads us to demand to see the supervisor or manager. Often it is the case that the lower-level staff have been given no discretionary power in dealing with matters and it takes the intervention of a superior to make a simple transaction possible.

It seems today that a reversal has taken place in this relationship in the operation of our system of governance and in the operations of many public institutions. Not only have many elected officials and heads of public institutions made themselves inaccessible to the citizens but they have left the frontline staff to spin all kinds of incredible stories for those who seek to get something done.

How do the citizens of this country get their elected representatives at the level of the parish council to respond to any of the concerns which they may face concerning the degradation that is taking place in their communities throughout this land? Many of our residential communities throughout the towns and cities of this country are being turned into derelict communities and the elected representatives seem unaware or unconcerned and are taking no effective action to stop the spread of this blight.

The second city, Montego Bay, has functioned without a development plan for decades, and when there are attempts to devise a credible plan they are frustrated by political interests. We continue to see parish councils with their complement of staff but cannot see effective work being done as there is the constant refrain that there is no money. Why maintain a staff if there is no money to undertake projects?

In my experience, a public institution like the National Water Commission is no different in its operation. Complaints about broken mains are made to the highest levels and no effective response follows. Citizens continue to make repeated calls concerning broken mains and all that happens is some lower-level staff member is mandated to offer some palliative word, intended to offer temporary relief but to get nothing done in the long run.

In the meanwhile, customers of the National Water Commission see millions of gallons of water going to waste and are told that the cost to the commission of processing our water is more than the revenue it generates and that a rate increase is required.

During the past year we have seen a number of missteps by the Government in the announcement of tax measures, and we have also seen a lack of response to public concerns regarding a number of developments within the life of the nation. There remain too many unanswered questions to public concerns around the conduct of political figures, the May incursion into Tivoli Gardens, and the recent WikiLeaks revelations.

My wish for 2011 then is quite simple, and that is, that persons in leadership in this country in the areas of governance and public service will understand that they are accountable to the people of this nation, and that their only right to continue occupying the positions they hold is satisfactory performance of the portfolio responsibilities which are assigned to them by virtue of the office they hold.

To the rest of us citizens I offer my wish and prayer for a year that is productive and which brings out the best that is in us as individuals and as a nation as we face the challenges of 2011.

Howard Gregory is the Suffragan Bishop of Montego Bay