Undermining democracy and governance
THE democratic system of government has been embraced as a sign of the advancement of human civilisation, primarily as it seeks to give expression to the will of the majority rather than the oppressive rule which has been exercised through history by despotic rulers or a privileged and oppressive minority.
As Jamaicans, we readily embrace this position as we recognise the history of struggle and bloodshed which has made the democratic system of government possible for us through the achievement of universal adult suffrage.
At the same time, we recognise that while the system allows for the majority of the people to give expression to their will through the ballot box, it is a totally different matter when it comes to keeping those persons who are elected in touch with the people who have elected them and in giving expression to that which is consistent with the will of the people and not just what is self-serving for the politicians. It is at this point that the gains of democracy stand or fall.
Political leadership as a relationship between elected officials and those they lead involves accountability to a particular community or constituency. Leadership that ceases to be accountable becomes oppressive, ego-serving, and sees self as the point of reference and authority for action, for dispensing favours, and for handling opposition. This kind of accountability also involves transparency in the administration of government and in the activities in which the elected leaders are involved. Political accountability of this nature serves to mitigate allegations of misconduct or corruption.
A lead story carried in one of our newspapers in recent weeks highlights one aspect of the problem of accountability on the part of elected officials. The story points to current legislation which, while requiring elected officials to make disclosure of their financial status to the Integrity Commission, also makes it an offence for such information to be disclosed to the public. While this may be a legacy of a previous era, of the not too distant past, the current global reality is one in which integrity in political leadership and in governance is a matter of great significance.
Accordingly, many developed nations make such public disclosure a matter of national significance which is consistent with the emphasis on access to public information in many spheres of life. In the case of Jamaica, in which we have been cited by international agencies as scoring low on the scale in terms of our ability to eliminate corruption, and in which we have been having an uphill battle trying to clean up our political culture, it is inconceivable that our politicians should continue to be so protected by the law.
The newspaper report suggests that politicians of different sides of the political spectrum are currently opposed to making such changes to the law. They want their data to be kept hidden from public scrutiny.
In the present regime, it is only the members of the Integrity Commission who are supposed to have access to such information, and are therefore the only ones who will be able to detect if any kind of misconduct by way of illegal gain is taking place. The reality is that it is the people on the ground who often know what is going on and are better placed to inform where evidence of such corrupt behaviour may be in evidence.
After all, the financial affairs of even the most powerful elected political figure on the globe is public information. So, here in our prevailing situation is another manifestation of disregard for the people and the abuse of political power for self-serving ends. The elected officials have agreed to a system which not only requires persons employed by the State to make disclosures of their financial status, but which also demands that every citizen who wants to use the money-transfer system to send a few dollars within the country, or even to deposit a few United States dollars in their account, to be harassed and to make a declaration as to the source of such resources, yet these officials exempt themselves from public scrutiny of their financial situation.
I have known of at least one highly placed Jamaican who refused to chair a statutory body because, although this was not his substantive position of employment, he was required to make a declaration of his assets. It is inconsistent for elected politicians to insist that their financial affairs should be such private matters when they assume public office and are functioning in an arena which has not only demonstrated its ability to corrupt but is strewn with cases of persons who have fallen victim to such influences.
On a previous occasion I made reference to a recent poll by Don Anderson in which the sample population gave politicians a single-digit rating in terms of the trust which they reposed in them. Given this kind of rating and the history of allegations of self-aggrandisement of politicians through corruption once they are elected to office, it is vital that the public have access to such information. If we are serious about stemming corruption in the political culture, then we must be able to see where elected officials may be abusing their position and, through illegitimate means, be enriching themselves.
The newsmaking stories of recent days have not helped to generate confidence in both the partisan and national political culture and are at this point proving embarrassing for the governing political party. The allegations of violence as an ingredient in the internal electoral process of the ruling Jamaica Labour Party is not only embarrassing for the party, but becomes for some persons yet another manifestation of why the political culture is one to be shunned as corrupt. This, of course, is not restricted to only one political party.
The concurrent allegations of criminal involvement in violence by a minister of government is a matter for serious reflection by all, and not just an opportunity for crowing by one set of party adherents. Coming as this does after several months of a steady flow of information concerning the alliance between political parties and elected officials with the criminal element in society, it is a further blow to the already flagging interest of some citizens in politics and the consequent weakening of our democratic process.
In the midst of all of this development, I have been travelling overseas and have included in my reading a novel by a Jamaican, Errol McDonald, entitled Legitimate Resistance: The Jamaican Connection. The back cover of the novel advertises it in this way: “This novel gives us a rare and exciting glimpse into the organised runnings of the underworld of the Jamaican Diaspora: The drug and gun trades, extortion rackets and their political connections”.
As I read the pages of this novel I get the feeling of reliving the events of the last few months which have transpired in Tivoli Gardens and Western Kingston. In a very accurate and prophetic sense, the author captures the thinking of the organised criminal underworld through characters that are as real as any that have surfaced in these recent troubling events. The leading gangster speaks of the mission of his gang in no uncertain terms as providing for the people an alternative to a neglectful and oppressive government.
Speaking to his young protégés in the gang, he asserts: “We represent an alternative to sitting on the corner and going nowhere… Look pon yuself like the modern day Paul Bogle. A we a go liberate black people in Jamaica… Someone have to do something. We cyaan juss gwaan so. History choose we. The gun is the power. Dem use it fi keep we down. We use it fi rise up. Is either wi rise or wi fall. Wi caan stay same place. …A war me declare gainst dis government for dem corrupt and incompetent… Not dis government alone. Di whole system have to change. But firs’, we have to tear down the old order.”
What is clear is that the author captures the sense of neglect and abandonment which government represents for these gangsters as well as the culture of corruption and incompetence which is seen to undergird the entire scenario. I have highlighted this aspect of the portrayal of the characters of this novel as it speaks to a dangerous trend which is being pursued by the Government in its fiscal management. This trend may have serious consequences for our society in the long run and lead to a deepening of antisocial alternatives to our legitimate democratic system of governance by disaffected and disillusioned elements who have found leadership and hope in the ambition of unofficial community leaders and dons.
It appears that the Government has been pursuing a policy of curtailing approved expenditures in order to satisfy the International Monetary Fund quarterly tests. But it is being regarded as a policy of neglect where the maintenance of social infrastructure and systems are concerned. For example, the level of neglect of garbage collection and inattention to road repairs, among other things, are creating disquiet and are likely to fan flames of discontent.
That is the breeding ground for discontent and the rise of godfathers who are willing to step in and do what the elected officials and institutions are not doing. The term neglect has been defined as a passive form of abuse in which the perpetrator is responsible to provide care for one who is dependent on that care, but fails to provide adequate care to the concerned party.
While it is true that the Government is facing a major challenge in addressing the country’s financial problems, it is also true to say that where the legitimate government fails to provide for its citizens certain basic services through a process of neglect, it is not only sowing the seeds of discontent, but creating the climate in which alternatives to the system of governance have to be generated among the disaffected, and this has the potential for undermining our system of democracy. Was this not one of the lessons of the recent uprising in Western Kingston?
— Howard Gregory is the Suffragan Bishop of Montego Bay