The period immediately preceding yesterday’s general election was marked by a surfeit of incidents of violent crime. That may have been no more than a coincidence but, hopefully, those crimes would not have failed to send an unmistakable signal to those seeking either re-election or election to office that crime has grown into this country’s single most urgent national emergency and that it must be placed among the top items on the country’s ‘fix it’ list.
On the whole, there is a complex and multi-dimensional character to crime and criminal activity which will make the problem an extraordinarily challenging one to fix, and the process will certainly require external help. That does not mean, however, that we should not begin by earnestly applying our own skills, resources and determination to doing what we can now.
What has been particularly noteworthy about the pattern of criminal behaviour during the recent period has been the surfeit of home invasions, a facet of crime which, apart from being invariably attended by intimidation and violence against the victims, almost always leaves indelible psychological scars. This particular type of crime is reflective of the kind of daring, bravado and ruthlessness that flies contemptuously in the face of law enforcement, and one doubts that there is a persuasive case to be made against the argument that home invaders are not in the least bit fazed by such deterrents as the Guyana Police Force possesses. Few other types of crime can, to the extent that home invasions can, illustrate the extent of the vulnerability that hapless victims feel.
The perception that it is the criminal element and not the forces of law and order that possesses what one might describe as a monopoly of both force and daring continues to be strengthened by the astounding proliferation of illegal firearms and the fact that many of these are in the hands of youthful, trigger-happy ‘tearaways’ who behave as though they have no inhibitions about committing acts of violence and even taking lives. These days, gun-related crimes are almost certainly more commonplace than choke-and-rob type offences.
To understand the devastating impact that some types of crime have on their victims you need only engage the victim of a home invasion. Then, you get a graphic sense of the psychological disfigurement which these types of crimes leave in their wake. What could be worse than being awakened in the dead of night by a bandit pointing a gun in your face and intermittently beating and threatening you whilst demanding money and valuables?
Setting the physical and emotional consequences of those ordeals aside, it the dichotomy between the enormity of the wrong suffered by the victim on the one hand, and, on the other, the realization that there is neither any effective lawful protection from those types of ordeals nor, frequently, any satisfying recourse save and except what has become an increasing resort to unwholesome vigilantism if the perpetrator is caught, that is most disturbing.,
Truth be told we live in a society where law enforcement is sufficiently ineffective as to provide a generous incentive for criminal careers, and even if the assertion that the state has been weak and ineffective in its law-enforcement responsibilities has become more than a trifle clichéd, it is a sufficiently disturbing concern to be well worth repeating.
As far as law enforcement and so many other facets of national life are concerned, we must of course blame ourselves for our failure to fashion the type of democracy that holds the feet of the political directorate to the fire. Accordingly – and again as we await the results of yesterday’s poll – we need to ponder whether this might not be the appropriate juncture at which we draw a line in the sand and require higher ethical and moral standards, and higher levels of personal discipline, decency and restraint among those holding high office, as well as far higher levels of professional competence.
At this time it is worth considering too whether law enforcement might not have been in a much healthier state under another Home Affairs Minister, perhaps one who did not so often appear inclined to place politics above professionalism. It was perhaps as a consequence of this, he failed to deliver any meaningful remedial measures in any facet of crime since assuming the portfolio. Truth be told, Mr Rohee’s decibel level in his capacity as Home Affairs Minister was not matched by evidence of a capacity to set law enforcement on the correct path. Indeed, it is probably questionable, based on what we know of his performance, whether or not he would have kept his portfolio for the length of time he did in a government that consistently held performance to be the criterion for occupancy thereof.
Much more than enough has been revealed in recent months to draw the conclusion that the government was guilty of injudicious spending to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars and that millions more have been corruptly siphoned off. One is inclined to wonder just how much better off in terms of crime-fighting capability the Force might have been if some of those amounts had been allocated to law enforcement.
Again, even as we await the results of yesterday’s poll there is opportunity for contemplation as to where we go as far as crime is concerned. We now know – if indeed we didn’t know before − that vacuous promises, however repetitive those might be, will get us nowhere. Secondly, meaningful development including, particularly, meaningful external and domestic private sector investment in the country’s economy, visitor arrivals and remigration are unlikely to grow and prosper unless we can bring crime reasonably under control. Put differently, tactical distractions like quizzical public announcements about oil discoveries encrusted in political advertisements are no longer the kinds of puerile gestures that will draw attention away from the bigger, rather less encouraging picture. There is really no good reason why meaningful change cannot begin with change in our attitude towards law enforcement.
