Dear Editor,
There has been a great deal of talk about the debacle started by the Minister of Youth and Culture recently, much of it expressing concern about our leaders' apparent prioritisation of their party's image over everything else. I agree that in this case, it seems that political sensitivity to even valid criticisms have trumped not only children's rights, but a willingness to accept basic democratic actions.
I am heartbroken to see that the leaders of our country greeted a peaceful rights-based movement with a reaction as retaliatory and petty as attacking its content and threatening sanctions. Worse still, hours later, Minister Hanna encouraged Jamaica to participate in Nelson Mandela Day — an event that celebrates peaceful advocacy and human rights. The hypocrisy is astounding.
Jamaicans for Justice (JFJ) started a petition requesting that certain measures — which the Minister admits are currently incomplete — be urgently finished. What about this is intellectually dishonest and malicious?
Issuing these facts is not "tarnishing the Government's reputation". It is basic reporting. If the State is looking for someone to blame for its embarrassment at the stories revealed by this organisation, it has no further to look than itself.
JFJ's lobbying on this issue is not new. The organisation has been discussing less-than-comfortable facts about the Government's management of its wards since 2004. Since then, issues have been published in the Gleaner, the Observer, on radio channels, and in JFJ's own press releases. Seldom has the country seen a response from the State as vitriolic as Hanna's denouncement of this single online petition.
The major difference between this initiative and JFJ's previous efforts seems to be the audience. Rather than being confined to locals, this information is now easily accessible abroad. If I were to judge from Government reactions, I would guess that they are more worried about losing face in front of foreigners than they are about letting down Jamaicans themselves.
To me, this matter should never have been about image, but since it is one of our Government's clear priorities, I can offer them good news. To our ministers: When it comes to reputation, organisations such as JFJ aren't really the ones in control; you are. Your finished actions in this sphere will speak far more loudly to observers than any petition JFJ could put together. If you do continue to lash out against all those — aside from your own associates, that is — who dare criticise the weaknesses of the Jamaican state. That, in its own way, will be equally telling.
Asrah Mohammed
asrah.mohammed@gmail.com
Government's reputation is its own to make
-->
There has been a great deal of talk about the debacle started by the Minister of Youth and Culture recently, much of it expressing concern about our leaders' apparent prioritisation of their party's image over everything else. I agree that in this case, it seems that political sensitivity to even valid criticisms have trumped not only children's rights, but a willingness to accept basic democratic actions.
I am heartbroken to see that the leaders of our country greeted a peaceful rights-based movement with a reaction as retaliatory and petty as attacking its content and threatening sanctions. Worse still, hours later, Minister Hanna encouraged Jamaica to participate in Nelson Mandela Day — an event that celebrates peaceful advocacy and human rights. The hypocrisy is astounding.
Jamaicans for Justice (JFJ) started a petition requesting that certain measures — which the Minister admits are currently incomplete — be urgently finished. What about this is intellectually dishonest and malicious?
Issuing these facts is not "tarnishing the Government's reputation". It is basic reporting. If the State is looking for someone to blame for its embarrassment at the stories revealed by this organisation, it has no further to look than itself.
JFJ's lobbying on this issue is not new. The organisation has been discussing less-than-comfortable facts about the Government's management of its wards since 2004. Since then, issues have been published in the Gleaner, the Observer, on radio channels, and in JFJ's own press releases. Seldom has the country seen a response from the State as vitriolic as Hanna's denouncement of this single online petition.
The major difference between this initiative and JFJ's previous efforts seems to be the audience. Rather than being confined to locals, this information is now easily accessible abroad. If I were to judge from Government reactions, I would guess that they are more worried about losing face in front of foreigners than they are about letting down Jamaicans themselves.
To me, this matter should never have been about image, but since it is one of our Government's clear priorities, I can offer them good news. To our ministers: When it comes to reputation, organisations such as JFJ aren't really the ones in control; you are. Your finished actions in this sphere will speak far more loudly to observers than any petition JFJ could put together. If you do continue to lash out against all those — aside from your own associates, that is — who dare criticise the weaknesses of the Jamaican state. That, in its own way, will be equally telling.
Asrah Mohammed
asrah.mohammed@gmail.com
Government's reputation is its own to make
-->