Party By Party: Where The Candidates Stand On Crime
By LAMECH JOHNSON
Tribune Staff Reporter
ljohnson@tribunemedia.net
THE Bahamas put the world on alert in early 2010 after a country which is noted for its sun, sand and sea racked up 87 murders the year before.
Crimewave is a word too easily used by politicians and the media, but statistics showed crime was on the up, and for a nation of just 350,000, dependent on tourism, it was a worrying trend.
By the end of 2010, the country surpassed the previous record with an extra seven murders.
Bahamians at every level in society were puzzled as to what was going on, what 2011's numbers would be and what the government was going to do about it. The murder figure reached 127 for 2011.
The most pressing issue in the Bahamas today is crime and the fear of crime, highlighted by the fact that the murder rate is going in the wrong direction - up.
Democratic National Alliance leader Branville McCartney couldn't have worded it better during his party's anti-crime and violence march in Bay Street last Wednesday. He said things would get worse if there was not an immediate intervention.
The sentiments from the man who wants to be the country's next Prime Minister are not new. His rivals, current Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham and opposition leader Perry Christie, have already said the same thing.
Mr Ingraham and Mr Christie have blamed each other for the rise in crime levels. The DNA leader has blamed both of them - branding them "failures".
Behind the rhetoric, angry faces and gesticulations, claim, counter claim and overused insults like "abysmal failure", what is their answer to beating crime?
What has caused this spike in crime? Do the politicians even have an answer?
Crime exists in every part of the world where there is civilisation, the same way that certain weak drinks are present at almost every party adults go to. If those drinks get spiked, there's chaos.
At the rate the country is going and with the world watching through their TVs, computer screens and smart phones, it is only a matter of time before this rising crime leads to the wrong kind of tourist being held up during a nature tour, robbed on Cable Beach or attacked with a cutlass in their hotel room on a Family Island. A celebrity or a police chief from another country.
Crime is one of, if not the biggest, concern for the voters going into the May 7 elections and the three leaders and their respective teams know it.
In 14 days, more than 170,000 voters will go to the polls to select a new member of parliament for the 38 constituencies up for grabs.
Marking an X next to the name of an DNA, FNM, PLP or independent candidate will ultimately decide which party will be the next government for the next five years.
How will the three leaders and their parties, DNA, FNM and PLP, match up and overcome the Goliath that is crime?
The FNM and the DNA have revealed their manifestos for public viewing so far and looking at both documents, crime is the top priority. The PLP has been very vocal about their plans for fighting crime.
The FNM, hoping to regain the trust of Bahamians, has released its full manifesto and addresses crime as a part of its "National Security Strategic Plan", Tough on Crime and Tough on the Causes of Crime.
The FNM before outlining its plan, stated what it had done and what it thinks is the root cause of the crime surge: "Trade and abuse" of illegal narcotics over the past several decades.
The party, according to its manifesto said it had "modernized and better equipped the Royal Bahamas Police Force, passed and implemented tough anti-crime legislation and improved conditions in our legal, judicial and prison systems."
The party, in its document goes on: "To complement these efforts, we have also worked with educators, social workers and other citizens to implement new prevention programmes"
Going forward, the FNM's goal is to have a "modern, efficient crime fighting machine," through a "properly manned, trained and equipped" police force "to prevent crime where possible, detect crime when it occurs and bring those responsible to account before the courts."
The FNM proposes to hire an extra 250 officers; specifically train officers from remote Family Islands to serve their communities; combine technology with community policing to strengthen crime prevention; ensure continued funding for police; create more police patrols and increase presence in neighbourhoods.
The party proposes "continued and adequate funding" of the judiciary, to complete the construction of the judicial complex and Supreme Court, and the appointment of a resident magistrate in Andros.
They are also seeking to empower magistrates, "in appropriate cases", to use their power to implement "alternative sentencing and restorative programmes to reduce the amount of non-violent juveniles returning to prison."
The FNM plans to "accelerate prison reform initiatives" to rehabilitate non-violent offenders so they are able to be reintegrated into society.
Weekly drug testing will be introduced, and a remand centre will be constructed in Grand Bahama.
The Defence Force is also a part of the FNM's plan to fight crime. It wants to increase manpower on the force by 180 and introduce a reserves list similar to that of the police force.
The Defence Force is also expected to receive additional equipment in the form of sea and aircraft to help in the fight against illegal migration, poaching and drug smuggling.
While not as detailed at the governing party, the DNA's The Vision 2012 and Beyond manifesto lists crime as the first issue to be tackled after the election.
The party will focus on six areas:
■Enforce laws without political interference.
■Support the development and strengthening of a Bahamian criminal justice system that works.
■Develop a comprehensive and research-proven system to rehabilitate offenders, including academic programmes, and work readiness and skill building programmes.
■Commit necessary finance and people to the Royal Bahamas Police Force and the Royal Bahamas Defence Force to ensure "they are in the best position to be effective in their roles".
■Ensure the enforcement of capital punishment and that bail is not granted for accused murderers.
There are some similarities between the FNM and the DNA's plans.
Both parties are looking to strengthen the capacity of the judiciary and the various law enforcement agencies. They also recognise the importance of reforming and educating prisoners to reduce the number of repeat offenders.
The similarities end there.
The DNA has publicly stated its intention to carry out the death penalty. There is no mention of capital punishment in the FNM's manifesto.
The FNM government removed the Magistrates Courts' discretion to grant bail for murder and other serious offences. However, persons eligible who can prove they should to be granted bail can be given a bond by the Supreme Court.
Is the DNA proposing to support this move? Regarding the death penalty, how will the DNA get past the ruling of the Privy Council, based in the UK?
Mr McCartney answered this question last Wednesday.
"We're making sure that if it goes to the Privy Council, we'll have the laws in place that will force their hands when there is a conviction on murder, that the death penalty will be enforced."
What is the PLP's stance on capital punishment?
The country will find out when the party releases its manifesto for the country's 170,000 voters to see.
People will then be better placed to cast their votes in the ongoing fight against this particular Goliath.
April 23, 2012
tribune242
A political blog about Bahamian politics in The Bahamas, Bahamian Politicans - and the entire Bahamas political lot. Bahamian Blogger Dennis Dames keeps you updated on the political news and views throughout the islands of The Bahamas without fear or favor. Bahamian Politicians and the Bahamian Political Arena: Updates one Post at a time on Bahamas Politics and Bahamas Politicans; and their local, regional and international policies and perspectives.
Showing posts with label murder Bahamas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label murder Bahamas. Show all posts
Monday, April 23, 2012
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
The Bahamas has had four murder records in five years... ...Our politicians need not add hostility through public discourse in a nation that already has a violence problem
The tone of political rhetoric
Over the last few weeks some very aggressive rhetoric has been exchanged between the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) and the Free National Movement (FNM). During elections, debates should be fierce, but they should also be decent.
Former PLP Cabinet Minister Leslie Miller has called for a ‘truce’ between the PLP and FNM during the remainder of the election season. Miller has made public jokes about State Minister for Social Development Loretta Butler-Turner’s weight and accusations directed at National Security Minister Tommy Turnquest that Turnquest said have offended his wife and family.
Turnquest has uttered homosexual innuendo about PLPs and also used words like rape and prostitution. The FNM’s candidate for North Andros and the Berry Islands Desmond Bannister said the PLP had a bunch of geriatrics at its recent North Andros event. Among those sitting up front were former Governor General A. D. Hanna, Dame Marguerite Pindling and retired Archbishop Drexel Gomez.
Politics is not for the weak and timid. To enter the political arena one needs to be able to withstand attacks of all types. Some of these attacks pertain to ideas, some to past conduct, some to the conduct of friends and relatives, some to relationships.
It is fair and reasonable for political adversaries to scrutinize the records of opponents. In fact, such scrutiny by opponents and the media is essential to the functioning of our democracy. The party that wins the general election will exercise executive control of the government. The electorate should be presented with relevant information by the media and other parties so it can make the best possible decision.
A line should be drawn, though, at personal attacks that have nothing to do with governance, politics or policy. Calling someone fat, for example, should not be part of the process. Similarly, suggesting that people are gay, to disparage them, should not be how we campaign. It is not illegal to be gay or fat in The Bahamas.
Furthermore, candidates definitely should not accuse opponents of crimes of violence they have no proof of. Such an act should be condemned by all sides and should not be repeated from any political platform.
The nastier the personal attacks get, the more hostile the relationship gets between Bahamians on the various sides of the political divide. If the rhetoric between the sides gets violent in nature, it is possible for supporters to take those verbal sentiments and to transform them into deeds and actions.
For the most part, there has been little violence in Bahamian politics. This is something to be proud of. It indicates that as a people we are able to disagree aggressively without needing to inflict physical harm on each other.
We should all work to keep our politics this way – aggressive but not unduly hostile. In doing so we keep our country stable. The Bahamas has had four murder records in five years. Our politicians need not add hostility through public discourse in a nation that already has a violence problem.
Mar 12, 2012
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Abuse, armed robbery, housebreaking, rape, assault, murder and attempted murder are rampant in The Bahamas... and speak to social breakdown... and in fact, constitute an on again off again war against the social and economic system
Gangster’s Paradise Part 3
Gangster’s Paradise Part 2
By Ian G. Strachan
Abuse, armed robbery, housebreaking, rape, assault, murder and attempted murder are rampant in The Bahamas, and speak to social breakdown, and in fact, constitute an on again off again war against the social and economic system. There are no shortcuts. I propose seven areas of focus in terms of improving the situation. I address the first three today.
Inequality and social justice
Poverty is the breeding ground of violence. Check the location of murders and the residence of murder accused and victims. Look at education and income levels. This recession, the lack of skills of the citizenry and their lack of hope, are breeding violent criminality – not in all poor people, but in enough poor people to terrorize a seven by 21 island. Baha Mar, in this respect, can’t be finished fast enough.
It does not help that our system of taxation burdens the poorest the most. It doesn’t help that crass materialism parades itself before the hungry, underprivileged, and marginalized each day, provoking them to question the order of things and take risks. There aren’t enough jobs, or there isn’t enough pay, to make the life of crime seem like a foolish option for many young men. The death of their brothers, cousins and friends in the streets doesn’t seem to matter either. And though we hunt down and lock up the drug dealer, we elect his lawyer to Parliament and make him a knight. What message does that send? It is cheaper to invest properly in a citizen’s education, health and socialization than it is to police, hospitalize, imprison, punish and rehabilitate that citizen.
Education
First, Bahamians no longer see the value of formal education. Most parents are unwilling or unable to make the sacrifices necessary to ensure that their children function as civil, thoughtful, analytical, creative adults. Seventy to 80 percent failure in math for instance, means 70-80 percent of students can’t reason well. That’s alarming.
I believe that too many Bahamians believe they don’t need to do well in school to make it. They are wrong. Many in our labor force have found out the hard way that when you are uneducated, you may find a job but you will rarely find a good paying one. Our expectations are far too great when compared to what most of us can earn. Add to this the fact that the work ethic of our high school graduates seems to deteriorate further with each passing year. Many men who entered the job market in the 60s and 70s with nothing but a junior or high school education knew a trade and worked hard. Many are successful businessmen today, walking in step with peers of their generation who got college degrees. The gap doesn’t seem so wide for them; however, the achievement gap that now exists between school leavers and college grads is big.
Second, the entrance requirements for the teaching profession must be raised and the salaries and benefits must be raised at the same time. Educational administrators (principals as well as ministry technocrats) must be held accountable for failure and rewarded for success. How can a system produce such levels of failure and fire so few of the people paid to fail? We want criminal justice, but what about educational justice? Make examples of those at the top before you squeeze those at the bottom.
The goal of our schools should be to produce responsible, civil, analytical, creative, trainable citizens. Such people will almost always believe they have options that go beyond violence and criminality. Most high school leavers in this country aren’t “criminals”, but they are citizens who, in a myriad of ways, can make life choices that contribute to the culture of disorder, incivility, destructive individualism, blind consumerism, civic impotence, foreign dependence, political ignorance, mediocrity, low productivity, prostitution, predation and poverty.
Third, our schools aren’t producing citizens who understand each man, woman and child’s responsibility to and dependence on “the other”. A key plank in the proper education/socialization of our citizens could be a national service curriculum and program. This should target all students. We want at-risk youth to have wholesome experiences and nurturing adult guidance that builds skills, builds community and builds esteem, but we also want to foster a sense of social responsibility and duty to the community and to nation-building in the well-to-do young Bahamian. Environmental stewardship, social outreach, agriculture, fishing, infrastructural maintenance, military and public service and so much more can be incorporated into such a program.
Fourth, college attendance is a serious problem. Our goal as a country should be to ensure that one in three Bahamians attains higher education. Currently it is closer to one in 10. This affects human potential, the social fabric, and our overall economic horizons. They will be able to approach life’s challenges with greater resilience and creativity. In a recent study by College of The Bahamas (COB) faculty, who surveyed a pool of over 300 prison inmates, it was discovered that 90 percent of those inmates had no tertiary education and over 50 percent of them had dropped out of school. College education is not the panacea for all that ails us but it is a crucial tool in the effort to build a more prosperous, versatile and peaceful society.
Parenting
The way that parenting impacts our nation is powerful and dynamic. Having an economically depressed, frustrated, neglectful and possibly violent person for a parent is tragic, but doesn’t show up on our crime radar, and that is a large part of why this very potent area is hard to properly address. The state, by and large, cannot police parenting. However, this does not mean that the state cannot and should not try to heavily influence parents and provide greater social and economic support for families. Funding may not be as great as we would wish, but how we distribute the funds we do have can always be evaluated and reevaluated based on clearly set objectives. What are our objectives? I have read many manifestos and still can’t point you to where our nation’s objectives are when it comes to family and parenting. Well, here are the five objectives that have guided France’s family policy over the last several decades:
Solidarity – to compensate families for the economic costs of child rearing;
Pronatalism – to encourage a higher birth rate;
Social justice – to redistribute income to low-income families with children;
To protect the well-being of children; and
In more recent years, to protect parental choice among family types regardless of whether parents choose to work outside the home or to remain at home to rear children.
All of these, save perhaps number two, should interest us greatly. The size of the population and the budget of a nation certainly allow a nation like France to have far more programs and initiatives; however, what money is needed to have a clearly-stated objective? And once we are clear on what we want to accomplish, then we can allocate whatever funding we have appropriately. There is a clear connection between parenting, violence and criminality. COB researchers found that 18 percent of the inmates who were high school dropouts, dropped out to help their families. Thirty-one percent indicated that they had been abused, 47 percent of them by their parents. Forty-nine percent witnessed violence (abuse) in their homes, 66 percent of that violence was physical, not including sexual abuse which was another five percent. The initial exposure to violence as a way of life and as a problem solving technique is most often in the home, the least regulated place in society.
So how do we get past the barriers and reach parents where they are? When a child is born, who is assigned to the mothers, particularly the 623 teen mothers we had last year, to help them with their most important social responsibility: parenting? Are teen mothers, unemployed mothers and mothers living in poor, high crime neighborhoods automatically assigned a case worker and nurse to monitor them for at least one year? If not, why not? How can our laws enable women to stay at home longer after giving birth instead of being forced to return to work, sometimes as quickly as six weeks later due to economic pressure? What are we doing to encourage young fathers to be more involved, positively, in their children’s lives? How closely do we regulate child care for babies and toddlers? Why is there such a wide range of standards for paid child care in this age group? Infant and toddler care should not be better in East Bay than it is on Balfour Avenue. This age group is far too vulnerable to be subject to inferior care because their parent(s) are low income generating. Regulating the business of child care, and income won’t be a barrier to good care.
Another point of concern is when we sign heads of agreements with major investors, if we have no family objectives before us then we end up agreeing to things that potentially hurt families. We allow multimillion dollar investors to ignore basic day care for workers so that the option is unavailable for young children to be close to their working mothers. I especially would like to see this happen in the hotel sector where shifts are spread across 24 hours. In fact, perhaps we need laws or industrial agreements that protect single mothers of infants/toddlers from overnight shifts and Sunday work.
Next we conclude this series with a look at community development, creating a climate of discipline and order in our society, and our notions of criminal justice.
Nov 07, 2011
Gangster’s Paradise Part 4Gangster’s Paradise Part 2
Thursday, October 27, 2011
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
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
Sunday, August 7, 2011
The murder rate for a country the size of The Bahamas has reached a crisis point... It is unacceptable
Are we doing enough to fight crime?
thenassauguardian editorial
Last Saturday’s triple homicide off Carmichael Road has shocked many Bahamians and residents of New Providence already reeling from a rising murder count that is certain to far outpace last year’s record of 94.
In what marked the 83rd, 84th and 85th murders for the year, two women, one of whom was pregnant, and a man were gunned down in an apartment on Montgomery Avenue early Saturday morning.
Police are investigating the possibility that the murders are connected to a double homicide that took place several weeks ago, not far from the site of the triple murder.
Police believe that many of the recent murders are connected and that generally speaking random killings are rare. This is the line that has often been used by senior officials trying to calm the fears of New Providence residents.
The murder rate for a country the size of The Bahamas has reached a crisis point. It is unacceptable.
By the end of July last year the murder count was at 54. This year that number had jumped by 31 by the end of July. Last month a recorded-breaking 20 murders were recorded.
Our average so far for the year is 12 murders per month. On that pace we could surpass the 94 mark before this month is up. It could also mean that we could record more than 140 murders this year.
We know that this point is not lost on police and government officials who have invested efforts and resources in the crime fight. And who obviously want to see crime brought under control.
The Gun Court has been an important step in the right direction and has so far been productive in helping to deal with our significant case backlog. There has also been a significant investment to increase resources for our police officers. And steps have been taken to improve the physical infrastructure of the judiciary.
But have those efforts and resources been enough? Obviously not.
More needs to be done to bring down crime in the country.
We acknowledge that the onus is not just on the government or police to come up with solutions, the community must also do its part.
However, the commissioner of police and minister of national security have been given as a part of their mandate the management and prevention of crime to the highest extent possible.
It is a difficult task, but we must do better than we are doing now.
The crime phenomenon is not unique to The Bahamas, the Caribbean or anywhere else.
We need to look at how other developed countries are approaching their fight against the scourge of crime and violence.
Jamaica, which has had one of the highest murder rates in the world, has seen a significant drop in its murder count this year after a gang crackdown, according to officials.
Based on what is often said by our local police and government officials, it would seem that a similar approach could prove successful here.
It may also be time to look at how existing youth, community and rehabilitation programs can be improved.
Perhaps it is time to consider — as some cities in the U.S. have done — the appointment of a crime prevention coordinator who works closely with the commissioner of police and Ministry of National Security to help implement crime prevention programs, among other things.
We do not have the answers, nor do we pretend to have them.
But we must do something more, and quickly.
Aug 05, 2011
thenassauguardian editorial
thenassauguardian editorial
Last Saturday’s triple homicide off Carmichael Road has shocked many Bahamians and residents of New Providence already reeling from a rising murder count that is certain to far outpace last year’s record of 94.
In what marked the 83rd, 84th and 85th murders for the year, two women, one of whom was pregnant, and a man were gunned down in an apartment on Montgomery Avenue early Saturday morning.
Police are investigating the possibility that the murders are connected to a double homicide that took place several weeks ago, not far from the site of the triple murder.
Police believe that many of the recent murders are connected and that generally speaking random killings are rare. This is the line that has often been used by senior officials trying to calm the fears of New Providence residents.
The murder rate for a country the size of The Bahamas has reached a crisis point. It is unacceptable.
By the end of July last year the murder count was at 54. This year that number had jumped by 31 by the end of July. Last month a recorded-breaking 20 murders were recorded.
Our average so far for the year is 12 murders per month. On that pace we could surpass the 94 mark before this month is up. It could also mean that we could record more than 140 murders this year.
We know that this point is not lost on police and government officials who have invested efforts and resources in the crime fight. And who obviously want to see crime brought under control.
The Gun Court has been an important step in the right direction and has so far been productive in helping to deal with our significant case backlog. There has also been a significant investment to increase resources for our police officers. And steps have been taken to improve the physical infrastructure of the judiciary.
But have those efforts and resources been enough? Obviously not.
More needs to be done to bring down crime in the country.
We acknowledge that the onus is not just on the government or police to come up with solutions, the community must also do its part.
However, the commissioner of police and minister of national security have been given as a part of their mandate the management and prevention of crime to the highest extent possible.
It is a difficult task, but we must do better than we are doing now.
The crime phenomenon is not unique to The Bahamas, the Caribbean or anywhere else.
We need to look at how other developed countries are approaching their fight against the scourge of crime and violence.
Jamaica, which has had one of the highest murder rates in the world, has seen a significant drop in its murder count this year after a gang crackdown, according to officials.
Based on what is often said by our local police and government officials, it would seem that a similar approach could prove successful here.
It may also be time to look at how existing youth, community and rehabilitation programs can be improved.
Perhaps it is time to consider — as some cities in the U.S. have done — the appointment of a crime prevention coordinator who works closely with the commissioner of police and Ministry of National Security to help implement crime prevention programs, among other things.
We do not have the answers, nor do we pretend to have them.
But we must do something more, and quickly.
Aug 05, 2011
thenassauguardian editorial
Friday, June 18, 2010
Clogged Courts... Clogged Justice
Confusion around the courts
tribune242editorial:
NATIONAL Security Minister Tommy Turnquest told Parliament Wednesday that at least 252 persons charged with murder are still awaiting trial. Of that number about 130 are out on bail.
It would be interesting to know how many of those on bail have been charged with a second murder, or have themselves become the victim of another criminal's drive-by shooting. Up to April 30, 130 murder accused were still out on the streets waiting to be called in to face justice.
Lawyer Philip Davis told the House that a murder trial usually takes a month. He estimated that it would take more than 20 years to clear those now waiting for their cases to be heard. "A near impossible" task to deal with, he observed.
The courts are not only clogged with too many cases, but also cases cannot move smoothly and swiftly through the system because of constant delays, either for lack of witnesses, summonses that have not been served, or lawyers who need adjournments because of a conflict in their own calendars.
A businessman, who was to testify this week for a theft at his office, after waiting four hours outside court for the case to be called, vowed that in future unless death were involved, he would never again call in the police to get entangled in the judicial system. "It is ridiculous what happens at the court," he said.
He said his case was set down for Tuesday and Wednesday this week. He arrived at the court at 9.30am on Tuesday. There were so many prisoners already there that everyone was asked to leave the court to make room for them.
He waited with the crowd under the almond tree in front of Café Matisse to find some shelter from the blistering sun. Later he hurried under an awning to be protected from the rain. "I am a middle aged man in good health, but can you imagine what would happen to an older person, not in good health, under these conditions?" he asked. He battled with the sun and rain for four hours before his case was called. When he entered the court room at 1.30pm he was told: "Come back tomorrow."
The next day, he went even earlier to secure a seat at the back of the court. He said that a sympathetic policeman who knew what he had gone through the day before helped him find the seat. His case was the second to be called on Wednesday. He gave his evidence, but believes that there will be at least two more adjournments in the magistrate's court before the case can make it to the Supreme Court.
In the two days that he was there only two cases went ahead. About 40 had to be adjourned because either witnesses had not shown up, or summonses had not been served.
On Tuesday he said in one case alone 15 witnesses were called. Not one was present. Of the 30 cases that day, no one had shown up to give evidence. Each case had to be set down for a new date.
Even a prisoner complained about the non-functioning system. He told the court that that day was the fifth time that he had been brought before the court, but each time his case had been adjourned because no one was there. "This is ridiculous!" he exclaimed.
Also at no time did the businessman feel secure. He said there should be somewhere for witnesses to wait so that they do not have to be so near to the prisoners.
He said all the staff and the police at the court were friendly. However, it was obvious that the court was under staffed.
"It was a total eye opener for me to our criminal justice system," he said as he vowed never again to willingly expose himself to such an experience.
As for murder cases, Mr Turnquest told the House, government will specify an amendment to a bill now before parliament that three years is a reasonable time to hold murder accused in prison to await trial. In our own experience, we know of a case that involved the brutal murder in 2006 of one of our own staff members. The man accused of her murder was back on the streets after only 14 months. He is still a free man and no more has been heard of her case.
Under the constitution, said Mr Turnquest, a person accused of murder has a right to bail if they are not brought to trial in a reasonable time. With the slow pace at which many matters proceed before the courts this has allowed many charged with serious offences to be released on bail, sometimes coercing witnesses or committing other heinous crimes, he said.
"There's no question that the granting of bail to persons charged with murder is particularly controversial and emotive in our country. The public is concerned and rightly so that persons charged with murder are given bail and remain free to coerce, compel, and influence others and tragically to kill again," said Mr Turnquest.
"It is critical that more persons charged with murder have their cases decided by the courts and we believe that this Bill is a step in the right direction," he said.
We suggest that a court be designated just for murder cases with its own staff to bring in the witnesses and keep the cases moving through the system.
June 18, 2010
tribune242
tribune242editorial:
NATIONAL Security Minister Tommy Turnquest told Parliament Wednesday that at least 252 persons charged with murder are still awaiting trial. Of that number about 130 are out on bail.
It would be interesting to know how many of those on bail have been charged with a second murder, or have themselves become the victim of another criminal's drive-by shooting. Up to April 30, 130 murder accused were still out on the streets waiting to be called in to face justice.
Lawyer Philip Davis told the House that a murder trial usually takes a month. He estimated that it would take more than 20 years to clear those now waiting for their cases to be heard. "A near impossible" task to deal with, he observed.
The courts are not only clogged with too many cases, but also cases cannot move smoothly and swiftly through the system because of constant delays, either for lack of witnesses, summonses that have not been served, or lawyers who need adjournments because of a conflict in their own calendars.
A businessman, who was to testify this week for a theft at his office, after waiting four hours outside court for the case to be called, vowed that in future unless death were involved, he would never again call in the police to get entangled in the judicial system. "It is ridiculous what happens at the court," he said.
He said his case was set down for Tuesday and Wednesday this week. He arrived at the court at 9.30am on Tuesday. There were so many prisoners already there that everyone was asked to leave the court to make room for them.
He waited with the crowd under the almond tree in front of Café Matisse to find some shelter from the blistering sun. Later he hurried under an awning to be protected from the rain. "I am a middle aged man in good health, but can you imagine what would happen to an older person, not in good health, under these conditions?" he asked. He battled with the sun and rain for four hours before his case was called. When he entered the court room at 1.30pm he was told: "Come back tomorrow."
The next day, he went even earlier to secure a seat at the back of the court. He said that a sympathetic policeman who knew what he had gone through the day before helped him find the seat. His case was the second to be called on Wednesday. He gave his evidence, but believes that there will be at least two more adjournments in the magistrate's court before the case can make it to the Supreme Court.
In the two days that he was there only two cases went ahead. About 40 had to be adjourned because either witnesses had not shown up, or summonses had not been served.
On Tuesday he said in one case alone 15 witnesses were called. Not one was present. Of the 30 cases that day, no one had shown up to give evidence. Each case had to be set down for a new date.
Even a prisoner complained about the non-functioning system. He told the court that that day was the fifth time that he had been brought before the court, but each time his case had been adjourned because no one was there. "This is ridiculous!" he exclaimed.
Also at no time did the businessman feel secure. He said there should be somewhere for witnesses to wait so that they do not have to be so near to the prisoners.
He said all the staff and the police at the court were friendly. However, it was obvious that the court was under staffed.
"It was a total eye opener for me to our criminal justice system," he said as he vowed never again to willingly expose himself to such an experience.
As for murder cases, Mr Turnquest told the House, government will specify an amendment to a bill now before parliament that three years is a reasonable time to hold murder accused in prison to await trial. In our own experience, we know of a case that involved the brutal murder in 2006 of one of our own staff members. The man accused of her murder was back on the streets after only 14 months. He is still a free man and no more has been heard of her case.
Under the constitution, said Mr Turnquest, a person accused of murder has a right to bail if they are not brought to trial in a reasonable time. With the slow pace at which many matters proceed before the courts this has allowed many charged with serious offences to be released on bail, sometimes coercing witnesses or committing other heinous crimes, he said.
"There's no question that the granting of bail to persons charged with murder is particularly controversial and emotive in our country. The public is concerned and rightly so that persons charged with murder are given bail and remain free to coerce, compel, and influence others and tragically to kill again," said Mr Turnquest.
"It is critical that more persons charged with murder have their cases decided by the courts and we believe that this Bill is a step in the right direction," he said.
We suggest that a court be designated just for murder cases with its own staff to bring in the witnesses and keep the cases moving through the system.
June 18, 2010
tribune242
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)