Dear Editor,

Dr Jason McKay’s recent column suggests that oversight bodies, such as Independent Commission of Investigations (Indecom), have somehow “made the police the enemy”. That is a serious claim. It is also a flawed one.

Jamaica remembers the years when fatal shootings were followed by rumour, anger, and political heat, with few independent mechanisms to establish the facts. In those days, every incident became a street verdict. That did not protect officers; it left them exposed.

Indecom was established for one reason: To determine whether force used by the State was lawful; not to persecute police, not to side with criminals, but to establish the truth on evidence. And the evidence tells an important story.

The vast majority of Indecom investigations into fatal police shootings have concluded that the force used was justified. Independent scrutiny has cleared officers far more often than it has condemned them.

Equally important is this: Where officers have abused their authority, or crossed the line into criminality, they have been brought before the courts. That is not hostility. That is the rule of law.

In 2025 there were legitimate concerns that police fatal shootings had risen to a multi-year high, yet Jamaica did not descend into widespread unrest. Public confidence was sustained because there was assurance that each case would be subjected to thorough, independent investigation.

Confidence was maintained not by silence, but by process.

When the State takes a life, independent scrutiny is not optional; it is a democratic necessity. The authority to use lethal force demands accountability.

It is also worth noting that in recent weeks Dr McKay questioned the value of body-worn cameras — another reform designed to provide objective evidence, protect officers from false allegations, and enhance transparency. Body-worn cameras and independent investigations serve the same purpose — they replace accusation with evidence.

When mechanisms introduced to strengthen transparency and fairness — for both officers and citizens — are repeatedly characterised as threats, it is reasonable to question the direction of that argument. Transparency does not weaken policing; it professionalises it.

Having led detectives and overseen complex investigations I understand the pressures officers face. Independent scrutiny, done properly, protects the majority of honest officers and isolates the minority who damage the badge. Strong police services do not fear accountability. They rely on it.

At a time when murders are declining significantly, when the Jamaica Constabulary Force is more modern and strategically capable than at any point in the past two decades, and when public trust has improved, we should be careful not to resurrect an adversarial narrative the country has already moved beyond.

The real enemy remains gangs and organised crime. Accountability is not the enemy of policing; it is what makes public trust, and sustainable crime reduction, possible.

Mark Shields

Former deputy commissioner of police

CEO, Shields Crime & Security Consultants Ltd

mark@shieldscsc.com