Dear Editor,
One would have to be living under a rock to not readily recognise that apart from securing robust economic growth, the scourge of crime has been Jamaica's biggest problem over the past 25 years.
Indeed, incidents of murders soared to new highs throughout the 1990s and 2000s, with the 414 murders recorded in 1988 paling in comparison to the 1,038 murders recorded in 1997. And with 1,674 and 1,683 murders recorded in 2005 and 2009, respectively, the spectre of violence and disregard for human life are things we would wish to forget sooner rather than later.
While we have been grappling with a high murder rate for the longest while, we must not forget that the most glorious opportunity to address the crime monster in a meaningful and effective way came in 2010. The security forces were in the ascendancy and had the criminals retreating, as significant momentum was gained in reducing incidents of murder as a result of the state of emergency limited to Kingston, St Andrew and St Catherine.
The very person now levelling accusations that crime is being used as a political football is the one most responsible for us losing that tremendous opportunity we had in 2010 to win the fight against crime, as he pandered to political expediency over the national interest. As the then Opposition spokesman on national security, Peter Bunting chose not to support the security forces' request for a further extension of the state of emergency.
I have every reason to believe that had he acted in the interest of the country by supporting the extension of the state of emergency, instead of allowing his obvious concern about the political mileage the then Government stood to accrue, murders and crime on a whole would have decreased even more significantly. No compelling reason can be proffered to excuse Bunting's actions, as the judgement and intelligence of law enforcement officials who requested the extension should have been trusted.
Isn't it ironic that the chickens have come home to roost, and Peter Bunting is now the one grappling with the results of the decision he took to not support the extension of the state of emergency in 2010?
Jamila Ormsby
ormsbyjamila@yahoo.com
One would have to be living under a rock to not readily recognise that apart from securing robust economic growth, the scourge of crime has been Jamaica's biggest problem over the past 25 years.
Indeed, incidents of murders soared to new highs throughout the 1990s and 2000s, with the 414 murders recorded in 1988 paling in comparison to the 1,038 murders recorded in 1997. And with 1,674 and 1,683 murders recorded in 2005 and 2009, respectively, the spectre of violence and disregard for human life are things we would wish to forget sooner rather than later.
While we have been grappling with a high murder rate for the longest while, we must not forget that the most glorious opportunity to address the crime monster in a meaningful and effective way came in 2010. The security forces were in the ascendancy and had the criminals retreating, as significant momentum was gained in reducing incidents of murder as a result of the state of emergency limited to Kingston, St Andrew and St Catherine.
The very person now levelling accusations that crime is being used as a political football is the one most responsible for us losing that tremendous opportunity we had in 2010 to win the fight against crime, as he pandered to political expediency over the national interest. As the then Opposition spokesman on national security, Peter Bunting chose not to support the security forces' request for a further extension of the state of emergency.
I have every reason to believe that had he acted in the interest of the country by supporting the extension of the state of emergency, instead of allowing his obvious concern about the political mileage the then Government stood to accrue, murders and crime on a whole would have decreased even more significantly. No compelling reason can be proffered to excuse Bunting's actions, as the judgement and intelligence of law enforcement officials who requested the extension should have been trusted.
Isn't it ironic that the chickens have come home to roost, and Peter Bunting is now the one grappling with the results of the decision he took to not support the extension of the state of emergency in 2010?
Jamila Ormsby
ormsbyjamila@yahoo.com