State authorities, including Government and the leadership of the security forces, should make clear their position on the use of body-worn cameras by members of the security forces.

As recently as September this year, Police Commissioner Kevin Blake was reported by this newspaper as saying that the Jamaica Constabulary Force recognised it was in members’ best interest to wear body cameras.

Said Mr Blake: “Nobody imposed body camera on us. We really undertook implementation of body-worn cameras… We always tell our police officers, ‘When you’re out there working, and you don’t have a camera, you may be the only one not videoing the incident from your perspective.’ And so we do that, not just for the integrity, but more so for the protection of our officers…”

Mr Blake seemed to be saying that, in an environment where the security forces are sometimes accused of abusing their powers — even to the extent of extrajudicial killings — images captured on body-worn cameras serve as potentially vital protection.

Hence, our confusion on hearing from National Security Minister Dr Horace Chang this week that body-worn cameras are of “very little value” during confrontations between lawmen and criminals.

The Gleaner newspaper reported Dr Chang as saying: “It [a body-worn camera] is of very little value. You don’t need to be an expert to understand… you put a camera on your chest, you start shooting at somebody, they start shooting at you, you going to dive for cover…”

He reportedly said the “primary benefit” of the equipment was in public order situations, such as the apprehension of street vendors.

Furthermore, he is reported as saying that soldiers with the cameras attached to their helmets found that they “…fell off” or got “knocked off…”

Yet, back in April 2023, Dr Chang was apparently a strong advocate of body-worn cameras as he announced planned procurement of 1,000 units during his contribution to the parliamentary sectoral debate.

According to the State-run Jamaica Information Service (JIS), Dr Chang said: “We see the body cameras not as a challenge for the police force, but as a means of ensuring that the police officers will have the second eye that will relieve a lot of our police officers from false accusations… It’s a protective mechanism…”

The JIS also reported Dr Chang as saying police uniforms were in sync with the wearing of body cameras.

By November 2023 Dr Chang’s enthusiasm may have waned since he was reported by the online outlet, Our Today, as saying that, while the equipment was on a list to be acquired, it was not a priority.

Readers may recognise that this issue has been topical recently following an Independent Commission of Investigations report that, for 252 police shootings this year, no body-worn camera was activated.

We believe that, even as the State robustly moves to combat criminals with superior force, the trust and cooperation of people at the community level is absolutely vital.

That trust won’t come to the degree that’s needed for as long as there are frequent allegations about the security forces acting outside of the law and abusing citizens.

As we understand it, that’s among the major reasons the decision was taken to invest in body-worn cameras in the first place.

The powers that be need to speak clearly and with one voice on this matter.