Sunday, October 30, 2011

The marriage of politics and crime in The Bahamas is a long standing one shrouded in silence

Gangster’s Paradise Part 1


By Ian G. Strachan


Crime and the political class


There is no greater problem facing The Bahamas, as far as the average Bahamian is concerned, than violent crime.  Unfortunately, violent crime is itself merely a manifestation, a symptom of deeper problems, troubling weaknesses in our systems, institutions, communities, families, psyches.  Some of the weaknesses are beyond our control – such as our size, our geographical fragmentation and proximity to the largest consumer society in the world.  Others exist because of our own neglect, incompetence, complicity, fear and ignorance.

It seems sometimes as if we want with all our hearts to do away with the shameful symptoms of our disease: Murder, rape, armed robbery, as if these were ugly, painful lesions on a pretty face, but we have no matching zeal to cure ourselves of the disease that lurks deep within, creating these conspicuous eruptions.

Over the next few weeks we will explore the vexing matter of crime in The Bahamas.  We will try to be guided by the research and considered thoughts of those who have already dedicated time and effort to these problems (because I have no interest in re-inventing the wheel).


Where we are


First, let us put our current situation in The Bahamas in perspective – regional perspective.  Here, we are alarmed at our murder rate.  I don’t wish to say that the alarm is misplaced, but I’d like to look at the murder rate for a moment as a regional phenomenon.  Where do we stack up?  In 2010, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Trinidad and Tobago had 472 murders or 35 per 100,000 people.  The Dominican Republic had 2,472 murders or 24 per 100,000.  St. Lucia had 44 or 25.2 per 100,000.  Puerto Rico had 983 murders or 26 per 100,000.  Jamaica had 1,428 or 52 per 100,000; Dominica 15 or 22 per 100,000 and The Bahamas 96, or 28 per 100,000 people.  (Police now say we only had 94 in 2010.)

The Caribbean nation most like our own demographically and historically, Barbados, had 31 murders in 2010.  By comparison, the U.S. had five murders per 100,000 people, Canada had 1.8 per 100,000 people, Japan and Singapore had 0.5 murders per 100,000 people and Germany 0.8 per 100,000.  You can see then that as a region we are recording very high murder rates compared to the industrialized countries.  In fact, the Caribbean has many of the highest murder rates in the world.  I could not find murder rates higher than The Bahamas’ anywhere outside of the Caribbean, Africa and Latin America.  Before this series is done I shall have discussed that phenomenon with some of our criminologists and sociologists.

Crime is much, much broader than murder, as we know, but murder captures everyone’s attention because it is the most serious, most shocking of crimes.  A 2007 World Bank report on crime and its impact on development in the Caribbean noted that: “The high rates of crime and violence in the region have both direct effects on human welfare in the short-run and longer run effects on economic growth and social development.”

That should sober us.  Crime and violence have deep seated economic impacts.  The report also noted that “the strongest explanation for the relatively high rates of crime and violence rates in the region – and their apparent rise in recent years – is narcotics trafficking.”

The drug trade drives crime in a number of ways: Through violence tied to trafficking, by normalizing illegal behavior, by diverting criminal justice resources from other activities, by provoking property crime related to addiction, by contributing to the widespread availability of firearms, and by undermining and corrupting societal institutions.

Perhaps most importantly, the report warned that in trying to reduce crime, violent crime especially, “There is no one ‘ideal’ approach.  The common denominator is that successful interventions are evidence-based, starting with a clear diagnostic about types of violence and risk factors, and ending with a careful evaluation of the intervention’s impact which will inform future actions.”


Whose side are the legislators on?


Over the next few weeks we’ll discuss a variety of crime fighting strategies available to us in this country.  But I wish to begin by discussing the role lawmakers and aspiring lawmakers have played in sanctioning, enabling and rewarding criminality in this country.  To put it bluntly, our politicians must choose sides: Either they are on the side of those who are accused of committing crimes or they are on the side of the rest of society.  They should no longer be able to have it both ways.  What do I mean?

We have sitting members of our Parliament and men aspiring to sit there, who have represented and continue to represent, accused drug dealers, accused rapists, accused operators of illegal gambling houses, accused murderers.  I distinctly remember interviewing a very accomplished politician once, a man at the center of many of the nation’s most important political events of the last 50 years.  This gentleman boasted to me of the number of accused murderers he had gotten off (it was close to 30 if I recall correctly).  His intention was to convince me of his legal prowess.  Instead I was chilled at the thought that this legislator, this champion of our democratic achievements, had also possibly had a hand in freeing nearly 30 cold-blooded murderers.  Someone’s got to do that job; I understand that.  But I cannot accept that it must be my elected representatives.

I have mentioned on a number of occasions the troubling fact that the Member for Cat Island, Rum Cay and San Salvador, and now deputy leader of the PLP, Philip “Brave” Davis, was the lawyer for the most wanted drug trafficker in this country, Samuel “Ninety” Knowles.  But Davis is not special, nor is he unique.  We simply happen to remember the name of his most famous client.  What about Carl Bethel, Desmond Bannister, Dion Foulkes, Alfred Sears, Glenys Hanna-Martin, Branville McCartney, Damien Gomez, Allyson Maynard-Gibson and Wayne Munroe?  Who have they defended over the course of their careers?  How many people accused of violent crime, or of brazenly flouting our laws, have they defended for a handsome fee?

These men and women will no doubt defend themselves by insisting they are not doing anything that is contrary to the rules of our Westminster system.  They will no doubt ask why they should be singled out and denied a living while physicians, accountants, engineers, businessmen are allowed to conduct their affairs and are subject to no such criticism if they serve or aspire to serve in Parliament.

I believe all MPs should be full time and should not be allowed to work for anybody else while they serve the people, first of all.  But that aside, the practice of law must in my view be treated differently, since the business of the parliamentarian is to create laws.  Doctors make a living making people sick (they’re not supposed to anyway).  But the criminal defense attorney makes a living helping men and women evade punishment who are, in the considered opinion of police, guilty of violent crimes.  I repeat:  Someone’s got to do it.  But if you do, how dare you then ask me to make you attorney general, or minister of this or that, or member of Parliament.  And how dare you give speeches about how you feel for suffering victims.  What kind of country is this?

What is the message you send to the street thug, the murderer, the drug lord, the rapist, the arm marauder, or to the impressionable admirer of such people, or to the victims of such people, when you choose to represent them before the courts and potentially help guilty men escape justice – not just before you run for political office, but while you hold such an office?  Yes, we are all innocent until proven guilty, but with 1,000 lawyers, I think it is safe to say that criminals won’t have too much trouble finding legal representation.

The 41 men and women who sit in the lower house and those who sit in the Senate should be people who have spent their whole careers defending and building us up, not defending and assisting those who are tearing us down.


The marriage of politics and crime


There’s more.  The marriage of politics and crime is a long standing one shrouded in silence.  Remember the 1967 Commission of Inquiry into the connections between organized crime in the U.S., casinos and the Bahamian government?  Remember the 1984 Commission of Inquiry into drug trafficking and governmental corruption?  How many arrests and incarcerations of Bahamian politicians on charges of corruption have occurred in the last 50 years? What has become of the so-called investigation into the handling of Crown Land for instance?

And what connection has existed between politics and the numbers business?  How far back does that connection go?  To the very heyday of the majority rule struggle?  And how many politicians, FNM and PLP, walk the streets campaigning with accused criminals on bail, or ex-cons or men “known to the police”?  Do their services as campaign generals buy them immunity?  Free legal help?  In the fight against crime, we must strike at the root.  Zero tolerance begins in our own house –  the House in Parliament Square.

Oct 24, 2011

Gangster’s Paradise Part 2

thenassauguardian

Saturday, October 29, 2011

Frankly, the easy accessibility of handguns in The Bahamas is a cause for consternation and a national issue that should be effectively addressed... Illegal firearm sales and smuggling operations within the archipelago has led to a number of killings of youngsters—most likely with drugs, money or women as the central figure of a dispute... and has created a breeding ground for the criminal element (drug traffickers, gangs, migrant workers, terrorists, organized crime, etc) to access these dangerous weapons and cause mayhem

The Great Gun Trade-In


By ADRIAN GIBSON

ajbahama@hotmail.com




THESE days, maniacal criminals are increasingly using guns as their weapon of choice as they disrupt the serenity of our once tranquil islands, going on murderous rampages, robbing families of loved ones and callously committing heinous crimes with no regard for the law. That said, it is high-time that the government imposes a heavily promoted amnesty (28-30 days) for the turn over of illegal guns whilst instituting a no-questions-asked, gun buy-back programme.

Although there will likely be challenges and valid concerns such as the uneasiness about persons possibly using money’s given for trade-ins to purchase weapons, genuine interest for public safety dictates that something must be done and that those fears, whilst likely, will not be predominant.

The wave of gun violence that appears to be sweeping across the streets of New Providence week after week has left many residents terrified by the thought that this small island is becoming like the Wild West as we are constantly inundated with reports of the grisly carnage caused by gun violence or told about high-speed chases and dramatic gun battles between rival gangs or of emboldened outlaws engaging the police in gun fights.

As of today, there have been 109 murders for the year 2011, most of which involved a gun. These days, gunshots are fired from cars—in broad daylight— on busy thoroughfares, in bustling neighborhoods, in crowded nightspots and hoodlums have no qualms about nonchalantly engaging the police in shootouts.

The growing trend of anti-social behaviour is rapidly leading to a state of social chaos, where boorish persons barbarously roam the streets like wild animals engaging in feral, homicidal behaviour to indulge their unabated anger. The senseless actions of uncivilized, dim-witted persons are rapidly casting the Bahamas in the image of a crime-ravaged hellhole on the brink of social implosion. There is no wonder why Bahamians—stricken by fear—have voluntarily chosen to live in virtual imprisonment, locked behind iron bars (windows), bolted doors and screens, and sheltered behind iron gates. In their state of paralysis, law abiding Bahamians have become more distrustful and are swiftly arming themselves with cutlasses, shot guns, bats and other safety measures to ensure their security.

Admittedly, I am a licensed gun owner and I support the right of Bahamians to legally bear arms, particularly in instances such as hunting or self-defense. Moreover, I would support a greater issuance of hand gun licenses to those Bahamians who meet the strictest of qualifications. As it stands, as a policy of the government, the issuance of hand gun licenses is strictly within the purview of the Prime Minister.

'Black market'

The Bahamas, a country with a recently proposed regime for implementing stricter gun laws, has seen a proliferation of guns/ammunition on its streets that I’m told is easily accessible and for hire to any deranged criminal. Undoubtedly, the spiraling street warfare in this country—particularly New Providence—is fuelled by the alarmingly high importation/smuggling and circulation of illegal firearms (from assault rifles to hand guns) primarily from the United States, that has given raise not only to the lawless behaviour that we now see but also to a ‘black market’ that profits on the trade of illegal weapons.

Frankly, the easy accessibility of handguns is a cause for consternation and a national issue that should be effectively addressed. Illegal firearm sales and smuggling operations within the archipelago has led to a number of killings of youngsters—most likely with drugs, money or women as the central figure of a dispute—and has created a breeding ground for the criminal element (drug traffickers, gangs, migrant workers, terrorists, organized crime, etc) to access these dangerous weapons and cause mayhem.

A few years ago, in a speech given at the CARICOM-US Partnership to Combat Illicit Trafficking in Arms Seminar, held in Nassau, National Security minister Tommy Turnquest said that the illegal trade in small arms, light weapons and ammunition was creating an “illicit trafficking phenomenon” as the illegal migrant and drug trade has created a single criminal enterprise.

‘Engaging Persons’

According to Mr Turnquest:

"Such criminal enterprises are engaging persons across national borders in much the same way that legitimate multi-national businesses do, bringing serious distortion to the concept of globalization."

"Whether arms in such enterprises are exchanged for money or for drugs, or are used to protect illicit shipments of persons or commit murders, assaults, robberies and other crimes; to intimidate and threaten and to enhance status, or other reasons, they contribute to the widespread availability of firearms in the region.”

The Bahamas is extremely vulnerable to the trafficking of nearly all illicit items—including small arms and automatic weapons—primarily due to its central location between the air and sea routes of North and South/Central America as well as Europe.

It is therefore imperative that we implement gun trade-in and buy-back programmes, similar to those adopted by places such as Baffalo (NY) and Atlantic City, to encourage persons to fork over illegal firearms to the authorities. Furthermore, a conscientious effort must be made to curb the importation of other potentially lethal weapons such as low power air pistols, replica guns and paintball guns. Sadly, it seems that our strict gun laws may only affect those law-abiding citizens, as thousands of handguns remain in circulation and outlaws are constantly packing heat, while striking fear into the hearts of already caged-in residents.

I would propose that such a programme is financed by an asset forfeiture fund, using seized money or money garnered from the auctioning of seized properties belonging to persons convicted of criminal acts such as illegal drug smuggling.

Frankly, the government, corporate partners and the church could highlight such a programme using the airwaves, the pulpit, disc jockeys in clubs, marketing companies, etcetera, whilst also affixing a firm deadline that concludes both the amnesty and buy-back period.

Indeed, a gun buy-back initiative should be inclusive of a multipronged approach. Individuals turning in unlicensed firearms should be given gift certificates and/or, more so—in conjunction with a cooperating banking facility—these persons could be issued pre-paid cash cards in varying denominations, which bear the monies collected from their turn over of such dangerous weapons. There are some jurisdictions that even incorporate a guns-for-groceries approach. For such a programme to work, the types of guns/ammunition and buy-back monies must be categorized—that is, $25 for all non-working guns (inclusive of pellet and BB guns); $80 for rifles/shotguns; $200 for handguns; and $350 for assault weapons (eg, Uzis, AK 47s, etc).

Reduce arsenal

Indeed, whilst a gun buy-back campaign can yield mountains of guns, due care must be given not to have the approach bastardized by gun dealers and/or collectors who may wish to unload cheap or old guns at a profit and careful accounting must be taken of the guns collected at all gun buy-back outlets. The goal is to reduce the arsenal particularly within the inner city and effectively bring about a widespread disarmament across the archipelago.

The police should also check their databases to determine the number of gun owners who are not up to date with their licensing and get on with the business of seizing these firearms and apprehending these persons.

Instead of pontificating about petty political matters, the church could have a huge impact in the fight against violent crime and the removal of guns off of the streets. In fact, there should be an amnesty period where unlicensed gun toters can feel protected if they take a gun to one of the many churches in our communities.

Furthermore, in taking guns off the streets, we must launch a practical, effective campaign that incorporates the government, the private sector and the public. There should not be a hint of the petty politics and political gimmicks portrayed by many self-serving politicians!

Gain intelligence

In the Bahamas we may soon need to establish an agency or department similar to the Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) agency in the US, whose sole purpose would be to gain intelligence and crackdown on the illegal weapons trade. These days, it is imperative that the police force continue upgrading its armaments as I continue to see officers on the beat without bulletproof vests and carrying six-shooter (.38) revolvers that they hope would counter the sophisticated, high-powered weaponry of criminals that wear body armour and carry guns with magazines that hold 15 or more rounds.

Police officers must be heavily deployed in those boroughs with the highest instances of crime and must strengthen their relationship with certain communities, thereby bettering their intelligence-gathering abilities.

Published: October 29, 2011 in the column Young Man’s View in The Tribune’s ‘The Big T’
 
Caribbean Blog International

Thursday, October 27, 2011

Branville McCartney and the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) are really creations of the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) and Free National Movement (FNM) ...If the PLP and FNM had offerings that wowed the people, McCartney would never have created his party ...But because he senses a national dissatisfaction, he pushes forward

So much passion about Branville McCartney


thenassauguardian editorial




It is always interesting reading your letters and commentary – especially the pieces written on politics.  Lately much has been sent in about Branville McCartney, the Member of Parliament for Bamboo Town and leader of the Democratic National Alliance.  Some of it has been published; some will be published.

The common theme from the well-written pieces, to the average pieces is that there is great passion about McCartney.  Some argue aggressively that he is ‘the One’ who will lead The Bahamas to prosperity; some argue that he is an arrogant upstart, who is not prepared to be prime minister.

Two of our columnists of late have dedicated significant space to McCartney.  Dr. Ian Strachan, an English professor and political commentator, dissected McCartney and the DNA in recent pieces in our National Review section.  Simon, the writer of the Tuesday column Front Porch, who defends Hubert Ingraham and all things FNM all the time, waged war against the green party in successive columns in recent months.

Beyond those who send thoughts, or publish in the paper, there is obvious interest in the community about this politician.  People always ask our reporters and editors, “What do you think about Bran?  You think he has a chance?”

The attack on McCartney in the House of Assembly last week by South Abaco MP (FNM) Edison Key helped lift McCartney’s profile as much as it raised questions about his conduct as a minister in Ingraham’s Cabinet.  Key alleged that McCartney petitioned him for work for his law firm while he was a minister.  McCartney rejected the allegation.

What was most interesting is that McCartney was quite aggressive as he argued his innocence in the House.  A longtime political observer, who was there during the incident, said McCartney said at one point, “Old man, sit down.”

Whether he said this or not, is beside the point. That comment, perfectly, encapsulates the fascination with McCartney.

Bahamians want change to a political order that no longer inspires them.  Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham and Opposition Leader Perry Christie are historic figures.  Few men going forward will ever hold elected seats in Parliament for more than 30 years and be prime minister.  Both men have done so.

The problem is that at the latter part of your career, when you have served for so long, people have already seen the best of you.  And in times of crisis or malaise, those same people wonder if someone else, someone younger, someone with new and different ideas, might not be better suited to take a try at fixing common problems.

We are not arguing that McCartney is ‘the One’.  He has much to prove in the months to come.  It would be a major achievement if his party wins a few seats.

But, we must acknowledge that many Bahamians have not been satisfied with the direction the country has been heading in for many years, spanning PLP and FNM administrations.

McCartney and the DNA are really creations of the PLP and FNM.  If the PLP and FNM had offerings that wowed the people, McCartney would never have created his party.  But because he senses a national dissatisfaction, he pushes forward.

What he should not be attacked for is offering for higher public service.  More young Bahamians, educated and trained, need to step forward to help their country.  The tone of some of McCartney’s critics is excessive.  To sum it up, they appear angry that he would dare challenge the established order.

We live in a democracy – the more choice for the electorate the better.  Competition should help refine the two older parties.  The green party is no threat to our country.  Whether it survives or not after the general election, it is just another part of our political evolution.

Oct 26, 2011

thenassauguardian editorial

The public is fed up ...In cases where bail can be given, they want it given ...Of course, with the amended bail act magistrates can no longer grant bail in serious cases, such as murder, armed robbery, rape, attempted rape and the various offences involving firearms

Magistrates starting to open their eyes

tribune242 editorial


AT LAST, public exasperation at the lenient manner in which cases are handled -- especially for accused with well established criminal records -- is getting through to the magistrates.

In the delay of the trial of two men and a woman charged in a major gun and ammunition seizure case yesterday, the magistrate told the prosecution to make certain that defence lawyers were given all relevant statements. She then set a date for trial and warned defence counsel to be prepared to go ahead on that date so as not to waste the court's time. Also, she did not want the public to be given a negative impression of justice in the court system.

Unfortunately, the public already has that negative impression. It is now up to the courts to dispel it, not only by efficiently handling cases, but by more frequent denial of bail.

The public's criticism does not just rest with the magistrates. What many of our letter writers say about some defence lawyers is unprintable.

Bahamians know that many of the court delays are from the Outer Bar, and the pleading for leniency for hardened criminals comes from the mouths of many of those pleading attorneys.

The public is fed up. In cases where bail can be given, they want it given. Of course, with the amended bail act magistrates can no longer grant bail in serious cases, such as murder, armed robbery, rape, attempted rape and the various offences involving firearms.

In these cases, magistrates have to take into consideration the need to protect the safety of the public and public order. The need to protect the safety of the victim of the offence and the nature and seriousness of the offence and the nature and strength of the evidence against the defendant.

Another -- and it appears recent -- element that seems to be slipping into our court system is a defendant's attempt to select his judge.

Last week, the Appeal's Court turned down such an appeal calling it "forum shopping".

Accused of drug conspiracy, the defendant tried to get his case moved from the court of Deputy Chief Magistrate Carolita Bethel, by claiming bias.

The higher court found no bias against him on the part of the magistrate, but did find an attempt by him to "forum shop". This is something that has to be stopped in its tracks before it gets out of hand.

In his contribution to the House debate on the crime bills, Fox Hill MP Fred Mitchell challenged government to live up to its promise of reducing crime through criminal justice legislation.

However, when it came to the witness protection bill, Mr Mitchell complained that it was unconstitutional to deny the accused the right to know his accuser.

It would seem that Mr Mitchell not only wants his cake, but he wants to eat it too. Prime Minister Ingraham described what would happen to our judicial system if essential witnesses were not protected.

Last week, the cruel death of a man -- a case of mistaken identity -- should have sealed Mr Mitchell's lips forever on the issue of witness protection.

The dead man was a case of mistaken identity. The bullet was intended for a witness in a murder case. This was the second time that his assailants had missed him. He is now in the witness protection programme.

In the House, Mr Ingraham explained the need for such protection.

"It is the duty of every citizen," he said, "to report the commission of a crime, to cooperate with the police, to give evidence in court if they are called upon to do so, to assist the police in the execution of their duties and to go to the Supreme Court to serve as a juror.

"In order for a citizen to carry out that duty the citizen must feel safe, must feel and indeed know that they are going to be safe not going to be intimidated, not going to be hanged, that their family are going to be safe, and unmolested because they are simply doing their civic duty.

"Whenever that can't happen, the citizen is not inclined to cooperate, is unwilling to cooperate; if he's unwilling to cooperate we are unable to have prosecutions, we have a state that cannot enforce its laws and protect its citizens from criminal activity."

We recall the outcry when airline passengers resented being searched before boarding an aircraft -- it was unconstitutional and demeaning many said.

Today when faced with either giving up that constitutional right or being blown to smithereens, they stand in long lines, meekly taking off their belts and shoes, emptying their pockets and taking their turn walking through a metal detector. In choosing between their constitutional right and their life, they chose Life.

Today, that is what Bahamians will have to accept with the witness protection programme. In some instances, accused persons will have to give up their right to know the person giving evidence against them, in return for the witness's evidence and to make if possible for government to grant Mr Mitchell and all Bahamians' wish to reduce crime through the criminal justice system.

October 25, 2011

tribune242 editorial

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Policymakers and other interested parties would need to closely monitor the national debt situation to ensure that the nation’s economy remains healthy and that our living standards are not threatened by excessive public sector debt

The national debt

thenassauguardian editorial




Governments, international agencies, rating agencies and most businessmen regard the level of national debt to the size of the economy (GDP) as one of the most important economic indicators in assessing the current and future health of the economy.

The national debt consists of funds borrowed directly by the government plus any debt of the government corporations which have been guaranteed by the government.

Governments usually borrow funds when there is a need to undertake capital projects (office buildings, schools, roads, docks etc.) and the revenue from taxes is insufficient to cover the capital works.

The size of any economy determines the level of potential taxes that could be collected to meet government expenditure needs for, among other things, education, health, law enforcement, social welfare and of course, debt servicing of any loans taken out by the government.

Current and future living standards in any country are influenced by the amount of resources applied by governments, on a yearly basis, to education, health, national security, social welfare and other public sector areas.

In order to ensure that sufficient resources are available on a sustainable basis for those fundamental public sector functions, good fiscal management compels governments to restrain the growth in debt servicing to a level where it does not threaten to crowd out and push aside the needs of the other important sectors of society.

In many third-world countries in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, the public resources from tax revenues to finance public debt have exceeded the public resources allocations for education and health; a position considered by many as an undesirable path towards the lowering of living standards.

In an attempt to address poor policy choices by governments, international agencies such as the IMF (International Monetary Fund), World Bank and the IDB (Inter-American Development Bank) which provide economic advice on a global basis, urge governments to try and keep debt ratios (total national debt as a percentage of total national output or GDP) to a reasonable level.

In the case of developing countries such as The Bahamas, the level suggested is somewhere in the region of 40 percent.

Most countries, particularly those in the developing world, have fallen short of that objective.

Indeed, with the exception of Trinidad and Tobago at 26 percent, many developing countries are in the high 80s (Barbados) or, in some cases the ratio exceeds 100 percent, (Jamaica at 123 percent for example), while the European countries have set the debt to GDP ratio at 60 percent as the desired level for their community.  Our nearest neighbor and largest trading partner, the United States, has a debt to GDP ratio that stands at an unusually high level of 97 percent.

When a country’s debt to GDP is high, it implies that the country is struggling and could have difficulty servicing its debt.

Currently The Bahamas’ ratio is in the high 50s and growing.

It is not yet in troublesome territory, but given the trend over the past few years and the growing commitments to further borrowing, including the Chinese loans and the associated capital needs of the utility companies, there is surely some cause for some concern.

The policymakers and other interested parties would need to closely monitor the debt situation to ensure that the nation’s economy remains healthy and that our living standards are not threatened by excessive public sector debt.


Oct 25, 2011

thenassauguardian editorial

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

Bahamas: Increases in population lead to increased crime ...while increases in gross domestic product (GDP) lead to decreased crime

Study keys in on causes of crime



By Candia Dames
Guardian News Editor
candia@nasguard.com



A new scientific study by a College of The Bahamas researcher has concluded what may come as no surprise to policymakers: Increases in population lead to increased crime while increases in gross domestic product (GDP) lead to decreased crime.

“If you know what your population growth is going to be, the government would have to increase GDP by a certain amount to keep the crime rate at wherever their quota is,” said Dr. Yan Lyansky, an assistant professor in the School of Mathematics, Physics and Technology.

Lyansky has come up with a mathematical formula, which he said could accurately predict what the rate of crime would be at any given point in the future based on the population of The Bahamas and the size of its economy.

“Everybody is worried about crime, but according to the numbers it doesn’t look different historically from what’s been going on a very, very long time ago,” he said.

“What I mean is when you talk about population growth, you’re going to naturally get more crime and everything looks consistent.

“It looks like maybe in more recent history there is little more of a spike but there’s not enough data for that to analyze.”

The paper is one of the studies that will be presented at COB’s 2011 Violence Research Symposium on November 3.

The goal of the research conducted by Lyansky is to find the best predictors of violent crime in The Bahamas.

“We assume that the government will be able to change policy to lower the crime rate if it knows the determining factors that influence crime,” said the study’s abstract.

The paper notes that crime has been an escalating problem in the Caribbean.  In The Bahamas, the general public perceives that crime is out of control, it adds.

The paper also says, “The police commissioner is under pressure to find a solution to the problem.”

The study says that as the population increases, the government may need to invest an even greater proportion of its resources in dealing with crime as the number of crimes increase.

It adds, “Government policies should be designed to increase the prosperity of the nation, but what this data shows is that when the country can not position itself to compete or can not cope with external shocks, then crime would be expected to rise.”

In an interview with The Nassau Guardian, Lyansky said, “We can predict exactly where the crime rate’s going to be moving forward, given the fact that it has been very accurate in the past.”

He said that many people who speak about crime and the causes of crime — including some authorities — do not speak from a factual position.

“A lot of the things that are written about crime, that I’ve read, and the explanations that I’ve heard make me shake my head.  They’re not going to help advance a solution,” Lyansky said.

As an example, he said, “The police commissioner, he was close to my house one day giving a talk and his explanation was that it’s all based on drugs and you know, that’s a bunch of nonsense and the reason it’s nonsense is I would actually have liked to make a correlation between the two, however, there is no data on drugs, drug usage or anything here so to make a blanket statement like that, it’s just a statement.

“You’re not actually going to be making progress from [those kinds of statements].”

Lyansky said there are so many inconsistencies in explanations some people provide regarding the causes of crime that it’s impossible to make any scientific determinations about them.

Speaking of the importance of scientific research, he said, “It gives you a better predictor moving forward.

“…If you need GDP to increase and you know the population’s going up, you need to do this to GDP and hence that would be a basic way (to fight crime).”

Oct 24, 2011

thenassauguardian

Sunday, October 23, 2011

All the pillars of society - the government, the opposition parties, the church, the judiciary, the security forces, the educational system, the family to name a few - must work cooperatively and congenially for the reduction of crime in our Bahamas ...The blame game is most dysfunctional and, at best, divisive...

IS THE SOLUTION TO CRIME TO CHOOSE ONE SIDE OR TO WORK TOGETHER?

By JOSEPH A WALKER
PhD, LLB (Hons) CLE



KINDLY allow me some space in your valuable column to make a few comments on the issue of crime in The Bahamas.

In recent times, it has become fashionable and convenient for those who were themselves at one point or the other, in one capacity or the other, in charge of our country to make public proclamations on the cause of crime and to point fingers at others for the same.

Nothing is wrong with this as it keeps focus on the problem but, in all of it, the proclamations appear to miss the real target. I will return to this point later.

One has heard the Leader of the Official Opposition pontificate about who is responsible for the crime wave we are experiencing and as to what he would do about it if he and his party were returned to political power.

It appears, however, that he has conveniently forgotten that he and his party had five years to deal with this said problem of crime but he and his party did little or nothing to solve the problem and they were removed leaving the problem to grow and fester.

When the crime, at the material time, touched personally, the Leader of the Official Opposition, there were many promises of what he was going to do to get to the bottom of it but, alas, nothing was done. The problem remained unabated.

The Leader of the DNA, like the Leader of the Opposition, has blamed the present government for the problem of crime going so far as to hold the Minister of National Security personally responsible for the problem, quite conveniently forgetting that he was a senior member and Cabinet Minister of the now governing party and therefore shares part of the blame.

While one acknowledges that the crime issue is one of grave concern, leaders as well as those aspiring to be political, religious and social leaders ought not to allow themselves to make pronouncements on this most serious issue based on emotions, spite, political pandering, personal, arbitrary and ascriptive criteria or on poorly understood facts or principles. To do so is to be divisive and it bodes no one well nor does it contribute to the solution of the problem which should be the aim of all those who engage in the debate on the issue.

With all the noise in the market place about crime, particularly crimes involving murder, the salient point that is being missed or ignored or not understood or factored in the analysis is that no one, not the government, not the Minister, not even the parent or spouse of the murderer can prevent a murder unless the murderer makes his intention known prior to carrying out the act.

Even so, one may articulate an intention and may not follow through on the expressed intention or follow through may be delayed.

Murder is ideally personal and, in most cases, private, even if it is committed in a public way. Some murders are spontaneous.

Thus, because murder and other violent crimes can only be prevented if one has prior knowledge of their impending incidence, it is shortsighted and, in many ways, unfair, in one's view, to hold any one personally responsible for them save the perpetrators.

It is for this reason that when the accused of a murder or other crime is convicted of his crime, not the government, the minister or his parents, is punished personally.

This is not to be construed to say crime cannot be prevented for surely certain measures can be put in place to discourage or reduce its incidence, but this will only be effective when we as a society have a clear understanding of the root causes of crime in our society.

Not the causes of crime in the US or other Caribbean territories as published in reports and textbooks, but those causes, if any, characteristic to The Bahamas.

The factors involved in causing crime are varied, multifaceted and, some cases, interrelated and, as such, any number of or any combination of them can synergise in any individual or group of individuals to result in the commission of a crime.

What we, as a society, need to do is to try through detailed and valid longitudinal scientific research, to identify, if we can, those factors, conditions, circumstances, community characteristics, family variables and even national linkages that are common among murderers and perpetrators of other violent crimes that may be trigger factors and therefore attempt to identify and develop and apply practical ameliorative strategies.

Even so, we may, at best, only make a small dent in the problem.

If we can, that would be a starting point from and on which we can build and learn. Crime is not a simple issue in any society.

There is no simple or easy solution therefore. If there were, other more developed and advanced societies would have solved it a long time ago because they have been grappling with it longer than we have.

All the pillars of society - the government, the opposition parties, the church, the judiciary, the security forces, the educational system, the family to name a few - must work cooperatively and congenially for the reduction of crime in our society. The blame game is most dysfunctional and, at best, divisive.

October 20, 2011

tribune242