A watershed moment in the House
The passing of the Independent Commission of Investigations Act, notwithstanding the 33 amendments, by the House of Representatives Tuesday, represented a watershed moment of sorts.
The Act, when passed by the Senate where it originated, will take power from the security forces to investigate themselves.
Quite apart from the substance of the legislation and its potentially far-reaching implications for good in our justice system, we detected a not-too-frequent willingness on the part of the political parties to get this done, even if it meant compromise.
Moreover, we wish to commend the Opposition People’s National Party (PNP) for putting the nation’s business before partisan politics, something we hope Prime Minister Bruce Golding will learn in the so-called ‘Dudus extradition affair’.
In the run-up to the 2007 general elections, the then Opposition Jamaica Labour Party (JLP), under Mr Golding, vigourously promised such a commission to respond to widespread allegations of extra-judicial killings by police.
We have seen too often where an opposition party would fight down an idea, for no other reason than that it came from the other side, regardless of whether it was good for the country or not.
But according to our report in yesterday’s Observer, the passage of the bill was fairly smooth in the Lower House, despite the numerous amendments, except for an extended exchange between Opposition member Peter Phillips — a former minister of national security — and Prime Minister Bruce Golding about the responsibility for the preservation of evidence at crime scenes.
Under ordinary circumstances, the police is in charge at crime scenes, whereas the legislation now removes such a responsibility from the police, in cases of police shootings.
At the end of the discussions in the House, both sides agreed that it was best if the Commission were to be charged with that responsibility.
Human rights groups, and indeed all well-thinking Jamaicans, will welcome this ability of our politicians to reach agreement on this very seminal development.
The preservation of crime scenes has been a major bone of contention between human rights groups and citizens on the one hand, and the security forces on the other, mostly in cases of controversial police killings, and where the crime scene is later tampered with.
The centrepiece of the legislation is that by replacing the Police Public Complaints Authority and the Bureau of Special Investigations, it has taken away the age-old practice of the police investigating the police, an exercise fraught with danger and frustration.
Indeed, the Bill notes that “the existing system of investigations into public complaints concerning misconduct by members of the security forces and other agents of the state has been found to be ineffective and lacking in integrity”.
We also commend the framers of the Bill for including a provision for the establishment of regional offices of the commission, which will be headed by a commissioner and deputy commissioner, both of whom will be appointed by the governor general, after consultation with the prime minister and the leader of the Opposition.
It is ironic that the same person who piloted the Bill in the House — Prime Minister Golding — is the same person who has shown himself so afraid of letting our institutions resolve our problems, away from the ugly clutches of partisan politics.