Since Jamaica transformed from a peaceful colony in the Caribbean to an independent country caught in the middle of the Cold War, we have had to change laws to survive.

Although our problems with internal security began in the 60s in that period called the “Troubles“, the real attack on our democracy began about 1974.

It was not just us; all through the pan-American region you had international influencers from the Eastern Bloc representing communism through the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and anti-communist influences emanating primarily from the United States.

Many leaders in the pan-American region genuinely believed in the political causes they pursued, whether it be communism or democracy. There were, however, others such as Francois “Papa Doc” Duvalier, the Haitian dictator who used the conflict to get support from the United States to ‘kotch’ up the brutal totalitarian regime that he led. It was, in fact, pretty easy; he just became a rampant anti-communist, and he was given a free hand to do as he liked in his country with American aid.

In Jamaica, the Cold War led us into an unprecedented level of violence that we had never seen before. As the title of this article suggests, we used laws to combat this attack on our democracy. It was an attack on our democracy because if communism had won, that would be the end of our democracy, and if the forces that were combating the communist agenda had succeeded in their methodology of using violence to combat violence, then we would have become a rogue State.

In fact, many areas of Jamaica became garrisons and, in many ways, self-policed by politically controlled or politically influenced gangs. So we created the Gun Court specifically to deal with the upsurge in gun violence that was literally being financed by our geographical neighbours on both sides of the political divide.

This act was called simply the “Gun Court Act“, and provided a court where a judge could serve as a decider of guilt or innocence, similar to the parish court or the resident magistrate court, as it was called back then, with a big difference being that it could order sentences up to even life for offences committed with the use of a gun.

This stands today, 52 years later, as the single most effective tool this country has ever introduced to control gun violence. This is my opinion. Some would not agree. Many legal academics argue the constitutionality of the Gun Control Act. Some would argue that other Acts that provided sweeping police powers, such as one we will discuss in the next paragraph, were far more effective at stemming the violence.

However, I always prefer a court to have overriding, even overreaching powers, rather than a law enforcement agency or an army, simply because decisions are being made without the immediate presence of violence.

The second law that was introduced that created a suppression of crime environment was correctly named the Suppression of Crime (Special Provisions) Act, 1974. This Act was used to give the Government the right to indefinitely arrest people and remand them without putting them before a court.

That is a layman’s description of how the Act was used. There have been many who argued that the way it was used was not in keeping with the dictates of the Act. Violence certainly didn’t reduce with the introduction of this Act. However, it is my opinion that if this Act was not introduced, violence would have been far worse.

When the Act was repealed in 1993, Jamaica spiralled into new levels of violence that increased our homicide rate by over 30 per cent. To be fair, there were other factors at work then. This included Colonel Trevor MacMillan’s purge of the Jamaica Constabulary Force, and the early days of the deportee crisis.

In more recent times, there have been laws passed in Jamaica, or current laws amended, to mitigate current threats. This includes the new Firearm Bill, correctly called the Firearms (Prohibition, Restriction and Regulation) Act, 2022.

This Act came about because of what was perceived as an era of “under-punishment” for gun offences, and the continued proliferation of gun violence. It has been well discussed, and there are parts of it that need amending, but it is working and playing its part in changing the culture of Jamaican violence.

When Jamaica discovered that you could call somebody overseas and tell them they won the lotto and they would send you money, a crisis of violence followed soon afterward. This was because large quantities of money were being put in the hands of irresponsible young men and had to be defended by one of the world’s most brutal street gangs.

So we introduced a law, a brilliant one that allows for a slew of offences to be prosecuted relating to stuff you have on your phone and other devices. The sentencing, to me, is inadequate because you are dealing with millionaires, and you fine them most of the time.

This crime that puts millions in the hands of young men empowers criminals and creates criminals out of men who would have likely found a productive way to live their lives. The harsh reality is that there is no profession or new business that is going to give any human being living in Jamaica or the United States that type of money.

I literally saw a 22-year-old the other day negotiating with a company in China to sell him a crane that you see on the building construction sites of skyscrapers. No business that you can start can give you this type of return.

Now, on the flip side, we have the dichotomy of a sentencing culture that often chooses to lay fines. Normally, I would say go with mandatory sentencing with a time limit to be determined by a judge. The problem is I see this crime as having the potential to double our prison population within four years if we introduce mandatory sentencing rather than fines.

The implications in cost are significant; the loss of human capital is beyond the ability to calculate. The young men who engage in this practice will never stop as long as there are victims ready to pay. This is no longer about “you won the lotto”, they have gone far beyond this. Now they operate more in the arena of fraud.

We need to create a think tank made up of Jamaica’s foremost sociologists, psychiatrists, criminologists, law enforcement professionals, and legal minds and find a solution to this crisis. If we don’t do this, we are going to lose a generation and put the country in a position where other countries limit the ability for us to communicate with them. We are also going to find ourselves having to import labour, as nobody is going to pay anybody $1 million a month to do a job, whether it is analysing data or pushing a broom. Our youth will become “unemployable“.

So many of them have already been charged and, by extension, are unable to gain employment. So we need to go into our law box and pull out a rabbit. We also need to attack this problem as a sociological issue. Most importantly, we need to treat it as a crisis.

Twenty-five per cent of the arrests made by the team I serve involve breaches of the Law Reform Act this year. This may not seem like a lot to you, but remember the Special Operations Unit focuses on violent crime. What is happening is that the two crimes now feed into each other. More importantly, we need society to include some political figures who treat it as a victimless crime, justified on racial lines based on a history of racial atrocities. That is until their account is hacked.

From a professional standpoint, I don’t see how you can have a credit card or a debit card that at some point will not be impacted by fraud. It is just that prevalent. The creation of laws and the amending of laws is to be encouraged, to be proud of. Many countries, including the aforementioned Haiti, choose totalitarianism as a mechanism to control threats to their regime. Many countries have used violence with literally no basis in law to combat violence in their country. Jamaica has, and continues to use, laws. This is why we still have a functioning democracy, and this is why we will continue to have one.

Feedback: drjasonamckay@gmail.com