The appointment of a new commissioner of police is often met with a great deal of scepticism as people wonder what new initiatives he will employ in taming the crime monster.

So the new commissioner, Dr Kevin Blake, who comes to the post well credentialled, will be empathetic to any lack of enthusiasm on the part of those who do not expect to see transformational change in the way the Jamaica Constabulary Force (JCF) conducts its business.

Although there have been marked improvements, people do not feel safe in their homeland. Many still do not repose a great deal of confidence in the number one duty of the force — to keep them safe and secure as they go about their daily business. Hence the scepticism and the lack of enthusiasm that greet a new commissioner as he takes up the onerous and thankless task of leading the organisation.

In saying all this, it is, however, foolhardy for anyone to believe that a commissioner of police, all by himself, can bring the change we need in the crime situation. Kudos to Blake’s predecessor, Major General Antony Anderson, for bringing a certain degree of modernisation to the force. It is not yet at the point at which we can declare mission accomplished, but I think it is safe to say that it has reached a level of competence and professionalism that surpasses that which hitherto existed. Its technological capacity and intelligence-gathering mechanisms have been beefed up to the extent that we are witnessing crime detection and prevention at a more sophisticated level.

Dr Blake himself was a chief architect of this. He worked hand in glove with the former commissioner and so should have a good platform on which to launch his own initiatives. One of the things he must guard against is the excessive use of states of emergency (SOE) as a crime-fighting tool. At his first press conference he studiously avoided wading into this controversy, suggesting instead the use of enhanced security measures to fight crime. He cannot ignore the voices of many in the society who say the excessive use of this method goes against the grain of the constitution. SOEs, as this column has argued repeatedly, were meant to be implemented under specific and rare circumstances.

The Government must give the JCF the legislative support that it needs to have enhanced security measures. What has become of the enhanced securities legislation that was introduced to the Parliament recently? I believe that passage of this legislation could achieve what SOEs are intended to.

Jamaicans well understand the need to give up certain rights temporarily in service to good public order. They do not expect their governors to abuse their ability to temporarily abrogate these rights, and neither should they accept the mockery of the country’s constitutional order being trespassed on by excessive use of the SOE as a crime-fighting tool. Ultimately, it comes down to a matter of governance. The new commissioner has the opportunity for a reset, if the legislative support is forthcoming.

This column wishes him well in the tasks ahead.

Speaker Holness’s Obduracy

This column is on record giving support to Juliet Holness as the new Speaker of the House of Representatives. I do not believe she has taken a serious fall as yet, but I cannot help being befuddled by her treatment of two matters in the public square.

The first is the advice given by Attorney General (AG), Dr Derrick McKoy, to the former Speaker, Marisa Dalrymple-Philibert, as to how reports from the Auditor General’s Department are to be treated. Holness has now inherited this matter and is under pressure from the Opposition to make the AG’s letter available to the full Parliament.

So far, she has resisted, and it is her obduracy in this regard that one finds confounding. For whom does the AG work? Clearly, it is for the people of Jamaica; in this case, their representatives in the people’s Parliament. Any advice coming from him regarding the direction of any parliamentary matter cannot be a private arrangement between himself and the Speaker who sought this advice.

One would have thought that if the Speaker seeks the advice of the AG, it is for the benefit of the entire Parliament. So why not make the letter available to the entire Parliament and, by extension, the people of Jamaica? What is there to hide? In the name of openness and transparency, the Speaker must step back here and prevent any further erosion of public trust in her speakership. I agree with those who believe that this may have to be settled by the courts. A fundamental principle is at stake here in determining for whom the AG speaks. This needs to be cleared up.

The second matter is the rather harsh letter that the Speaker sent to the former clerk of the House, Valrie Curtis. Everyone is agreed that for over three decades Curtis gave invaluable and sterling service to Parliament. In a clear peeve, or perhaps to demonstrate her authority, the Speaker accused her of bringing the Parliament into disrepute and dereliction of duty.

To many observers, this is an unfair assessment which does not square with the facts. To further place this letter on her file for posterity is unconscionable. This impugning of her integrity is abominable. For fairness and justice, the Speaker would be well advised to remove the letter from her file. Any attempt by the Parliament to honour her with this languishing on her file is hollow.

Until it is clear — and the Speaker should make this so — that the letter has been removed, if I were Curtis, I would not accept the hypocrisy in which such honour would be wrapped.

Dr Raulston Nembhard is a priest, social commentator, and author of the books Finding Peace in the Midst of Life’s Storms; The Self-esteem Guide to a Better Life, and Beyond Petulance: Republican Politics and the Future of America. Send comments to the Jamaica Observer or stead6655@aol.com.