Dear Editor,

In response to the act of terrorism in Cherry Tree Lane, Clarendon, which claimed the lives of eight residents, including a seven-year-old boy, and injuring numerous others, Prime Minister Andrew Holness stated that the killers must either “meet a judge or meet their maker”. Indeed, the massacre has not only rocked the parish, which is known for violence, but it has also brought a shock wave of grief over the entire country as well as the Caribbean.

Rights group Jamaicans for Justice (JFJ) has taken issue with the prime minister’s statement, labelling it as “State badmanness” and noting that it has “dangerous undertones, given the implications of such statements on the rule of law and public safety”. JFJ’s Executive Director Mickel Jackson continued by saying: “By suggesting that individuals must face the court or their makers, there is a risk of inciting a culture of violence and retribution, undermining the very principles of justice that we, as a society, hold dear. This rhetoric not only threatens to escalate tensions but may also embolden individuals to take the law into their own hands, further complicating the already precarious situation that law enforcement agencies are trying to manage.”

Evidently enraged, like many other Jamaicans, Government Senator Abka Fitz-Henley said that it is unfortunate that JFJ has become an organisation that is perceived as one which provides comfort for rogue elements and is supportive of criminals.

JFJ, in my opinion, has become a tone-deaf entity which leans towards giving ammunition to criminals. It is clear that it has to make regular statements on these issues to remain relevant and maintain its funding. Interestingly, the entity tends to read deeply into utterances by the Government and present an interpretation that is sometimes far from what was intended. Isn’t it funny how JFJ accuses the Government of making statements and using strategies in crime fighting that can incite further violence and jungle justice yet they fail to see how their own position supports the escalation of crime and violence? Whose side should Jamaicans support in this case, JFJ’s or the Government’s?

There is an epidemic of crime in the Caribbean. I recently visited St Lucia and Barbados and was told that crime is on the rise in these islands. Similarly, Trinidad and Tobago has been experiencing an exponential spike. Recently, the news reported that police in Trinidad killed six people.

Citizens are also disgruntled with the light sentences handed down by judges to some of these hoodlums, many of whom are repeat offenders. Frankly, we are tired! These criminals have no mercy. Many of them are barefaced and brazenly challenge our armed forces. Consequently, if they confront the State, shouldn’t they expect to be brought before a judge or face their maker?

At the same time, the State must do its best to dismantle criminal organisations and the flow of guns and ammunitions into the country. We are equally tired of the rhetoric of condemnation from our leaders whenever gruesome acts such as the one in Cherry Tree Lane occur. It is also clear that an overhaul is needed of the corrections system. How does contraband, such as smartphones, enter our prisons? If criminals are locked away as part of their punishment, how do they have the capacity to organise criminal activities from behind bars? Undeniably, some police officers, soldiers, and other high-profile people are part of criminal organisations despite the good apples who do their work diligently and ethically.

Who are we to trust when those who took an oath to serve and protect are themselves a part of the plot to wreak havoc on the country through bloodshed?

Oneil Madden

maddenoniel@yahoo.com