INDECOM

SC20131107-111351-1

Tweet by MP Damion Crawford

Between 1990 and 2000, according to official statistics, an average of 140 people were shot and killed per year by Jamaica’s police, a high figure in a country of only 2.6 million people. Between 2000 and 2002, the number of deaths rose to 150 per year and then, after decreasing slightly in 2003 and 2004, rose to 168 in 2005. With an additional 110 persons shot non-fatally by police in 2005, the total number of police shooting victims reached the highest level since 1991. All in all, between October 1999 and February 2006, at least 700 and possibly more than 800 persons died in the line of police fire. According to statistics of the Jamaica Constabulary Force, police shot and killed 272 people in 2007, 224 people in 2008, and 253 people in 2009.”

In 2010,police forces reportedly killed 385 persons; over one-fifth of those who died violently that year died at the hands of those with State-sanctioned authority and power

Inter-American Commission on Human Rights: “Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Jamaica”, August 2012

***

The Independent Commission of Investigations (INDECOM) came into being on August 16, 2010, taking over the role of the Police Public Complaints Authority.

As the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) outlined, the situation in Jamaica has been tragic. Year after year, the number of reported deaths at the hands of the police increased. For victims’ families, there appeared to be little appearance of justice since, essentially, the police were left to investigate themselves. Before INDECOM, we were entrusting justice to those who allegedly committed the offence. Where was the assurance in this? Where was the objectivity? The oversight? The transparency?

This is what makes Member of Parliament for East Rural St. Andrew Mr. Damion Crawford’s tweet so unpalatable and unfortunate. It appears to lack sensitivity to people who are still grieving; people who are STILL waiting on justice.

Other Jurisdictions

The existence of an independent police oversight body isn’t unique to Jamaica.  Ours isn’t the only jurisdiction that saw the need for one.

Canada

Canada has at least 15 civilian oversight bodies for police conduct with Ontario alone having three.

Ontario’s Special Investigation Unit (SIU) is a “civilian law enforcement agency, independent of the police, that conducts criminal investigations into circumstances involving police and civilians that have resulted in serious injury, death or allegations of sexual assault. In the course of its investigations, the Unit gathers and assesses evidence, and the Director of the SIU decides whether or not the evidence leads to the reasonable belief that a criminal offence has been committed. If the Director forms such a belief, she or he shall lay a criminal charge against the officer(s), and that charge will then be prosecuted by the Crown Attorney.  If the Director does not form such a belief, she or he cannot lay a criminal charge against the office(s).

The Office of the Independent Police Review Director (OIPRD) is described as “an arms-length agency of the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General, staffed entirely by civilians“. Additionally, they outline that their goal is “to provide an objective, impartial office to receive, manage and oversee the investigation of public complaints against Ontario’s police. The OIPRD also investigates some public complaints.”

United States

It is estimated that in the U.S. there are over 100 municipalities with some form of external oversight for police conduct (Bobb, 2005)

For example, in New York City there exists the Civilian Complaint Review Board, which handles complaints regarding four types of alleged police misconduct – force (including deadly force), abuse of authority, discourtesy, and offensive language. The NYC Civilian Complaint Review Board was established as an all-civilian agency in 1993.

England and Wales

The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) is a body independent of the police and government, and sets the standard by which police complaints are handled. The nature of complaints that should be referred to the IPCC include conduct that has led to someone dying or being seriously injured, serious assault, serious sexual offence, serious corruption, criminal offence or behaviour that would lead to misconduct proceedings and that is aggravated by discriminatory behaviour on the grounds of a person’s race, sex, religion or other status (http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/complaints/referral).

(…and closer to home) Trinidad and Tobago

Trinidad and Tobago has the Police Complaints Authority, described as “an independent corporate body mandated, among other things, to investigate complaints within its remit without the involvement of the police“.

So what’s Jamaica’s problem? If the standard internationally is to establish independent oversight for police conduct, why are we attempting to avoid this?

Mawby and Wright (2005), in their report entitled Police Accountability in the United Kingdom, noted that accountability in the police force remains significant. They highlighted two main reasons pertinent to the context of human rights:

  1. The paradox of police governance: There is a need to balance the unwarranted exercise of coercive power by the police with enabling their effective operation
  2. Policing is political: Policing is about the exercise of power and there are competing options for policing priorities and style

In striking the tenuous balance in point #1, and especially given the context of power inherent in policing (point #2), it makes complete sense to have an INDEPENDENT oversight body to ensure that human rights are protected while high standards of police conduct are maintained during operations.

Between July and October 2013, 80 civilians were killed by agents of the State.

Think, Jamaica.

– @MizDurie, @THINKJamaica

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to INDECOM

  1. petchary says:

    @MizDurie, Thanks so much for posting this so quickly. I cannot believe that a government minister could fail to grasp some fundamental issues that we have wrestled with for years, now. I have noticed, though, a subtle undermining of INDECOM going on (even by Min Bunting) so I guess he thinks he is very clever, jumping on the bandwagon. It is shallow and ill-informed and as a public official he should know better than to go on Twitter, and then the radio, spouting nonsense.

  2. Thanks for this very informed and informative response to the shallow, nonsensical and ill informed comments of Damian Crawford – someone who should know better.

  3. me says:

    AND, on top of everything else, he apparently was tweeting while driving. Ridiculous.

  4. petchary says:

    Oh, was he?! Also, I have a problem with government officials tweeting personal opinions. Should they be doing this, really? His Twitter profile says “opinions my own” or something like that. But as a Government Minister should he be doing this? His “Build, build, build” tweet on Goat Islands was equally ill-informed, by the way.

  5. Pingback: Say YES to INDECOM if you want to be taken seriously Mr Crawford– | Active Voice

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s