As the entertainment circuit continued to buzz following news of the arrest and charge of dancehall artiste Kiprich, age-old arguments surrounding the right to creative expression and freedom of speech have been rehashed.

Dancehall fans believe law enforcers are unfairly targeting entertainers, a move said to be strategic in aiding in controlling the content being released.

One entertainment lawyer has since urged law enforcement to use the opportunity to prove that the crackdown is unbiased and part of the police’s strategy to serve and protect all citizens.

“What I think the authorities are trying to do is take a harder stance where gang-related activities and area dons and the worshipping, heralding of said dons. I think they are using Kiprich as their example to say, ‘We’re gonna come down harder on every facet of society,’ ” said attorney-at-law Ronald Young.

He seasoned attorney reasoned that, having opened the floodgates, authorities must now be prepared to keep that energy when entertainers spew violent lyrics against any other group, not just the police.

“I don’t think there should be any kind of violent threats being made against any sector of society or group of persons and, interestingly, there have been violent lyrics for decades against particular groups of people, for example, persons in the gay community, and no one has sought to do anything about it in terms of the authorities,” he shared. “That community has been the subject of violence in songs for years and I can’t think of any history of arrest of the artistes who have spit those lyrics. I believe The Offences against the Person Act is wide enough that it covers those things as well, so it will be interesting to see this new stance and how wide the authorities try to cast their nets now to not carry out this crackdown in a hypocritical way.”

He continued: “There have been instances in the past where lyrics have put one community against the other and I can’t recall there being any arrests. Is it because they are not the police? Again, it’s about fairness.”

Young went on to share that art has always mimicked society and sought to remind law enforcers about infringing on an artiste’s right to creative expression and freedom of speech.

“I think that there has to be a balancing act, because there is a constitutional right to freedom of expression which has to be preserved and protected and that is important because you can stifle creativity and the development of our musical product,” he said.

Still, the experienced lawyer says artistes, while reserving the right to freedom of speech, should understand the power and influence they possess and should express themselves responsibly.

“There is legislation that does specifically state that if, for example, the lyrics of a song amount to a direct threat or incitement of violence or harm against the police then somebody could be charged. And so they [the police] did go by legislation in arresting him [Kiprich],” he said. “If you are a creative, there are ways in which you can mirror what is happening in society without promoting violence — not saying this was what he did. Look at a Welcome to Jamrock by Damian Marley, which speaks to the harsh realities of the Jamaican inner cities. There is a difference between outlining those realities and someone saying, ‘Let us go and kill this group of people.’ The second one is less creative.”

Young said: “You can shine a light on society and the reality of what happens or is happening without advocating for harm to come to a particular group.”

The St Catherine North police last week included Kiprich, whose given name is Marlon Plunkett, among 16 individuals named as persons of interest. The 45-year-old deejay was on Monday charged with the use of audio and audiovisual communication to promote criminal activity. The charge arose from a recent dubplate.