Maroon Treaty due an update?
Dear Editor,
Recently Accompong returned to the news not only because of the Maroon celebrations, but also the shooting incident that seems to have left more questions than answers concerning the State’s role in a Maroon community.
It was not the first time the community made headlines. The last time was in regard to an incident in which their leader, Colonel Richard Currie, confronted the police, aided by his supporters, as they were patrolling the area. Since then the relationship between the Accompong Maroons and the State of Jamaica has soured.
On Sunday Prime Minister Andrew Holness put his foot down by declaring that Jamaica is a unitary State, meaning, while Colonel Currie may talk, Accompong falls under the Government of Jamaica’s jurisdiction and, by extension, the Jamaica Constabulary Force and every government body there is.
I would recommend that both sides, the Government and the Accompong Maroons, especially the chief, try to negotiate and come to a consensus about the Maroon territories because, let’s be honest, the Maroon Treaty may need an update.
The 1738 Maroon Treaty was agreed at a time when the island was a colony of Britain, which was forced to come to an agreement with them after costly guerilla warfare. Neither side ever accounted for, or foresaw, Britain leaving an independent Jamaica to make provisions for that occurrence. The treaty may be outdated as one of the principal parties (Britain) no longer has a claim to the island. The Government of Jamaica is a different entity, a different story.
There needs to be a consensus as to whether the Maroon communities are either a sovereign proto-state within a State, or an indigenous reserve (much like the native indians in the US), or the average town flying the Jamaican flag?
What role should the Jamaican Government play in the community? Would the police or any other agent of the State even be allowed to carry out their constitutional role as night watchman and fixer of public utilities there? Is Colonel Currie a leader of an actual State, a leader of a native reserve, or a community leader taking his job a bit too seriously? It would be useful to get those questions answered before another incident.
Hopefully there is some agreement and closure to this matter because having a country divided along party lines every five years is one thing, but having a breakaway proto-state within a State is a whole different cup of tea we shouldn’t drink.
Marcus White
whitemarc918@gmail.com