This will be a short essay, hopefully sharp and to the point. I will say some things which are uncharacteristic, even outrageous, because, nobody else seems upset by the actions of the anti-social element in our society.
“Give them self-government and independence and, let the Human Rights Commission tie their hands, so that they can’t discipline their people, and they will fall into chaos.” The words in quotation marks, said by a white supremacist, were quoted in a article in Amandala by Mrs. Anne K. Lowe. What they mean is that colonial peoples are incapable of governing themselves. I always thought and I do believe, still, that no foreign government can govern a country better than their own leaders. I said can but, there is no assurance that they will. In the case of Belize, would you say that they have?
This will be a call to action because, we are in a war. The war has not yet been declared. I can’t understand why not because, if we don’t realize that we are in a war, which threatens to destroy our society, we will lose this war.
It is strange that we are in a war against drugs, which was declared by a foreign government and, in pursuit of that war, we have taken away the “presumption of innocence” from citizens who are presumed to be in possession of illegal drugs. That is not our war but, we are fighting as if it were. Our war is with a more insidious enemy. Our enemy is not from outside. Our enemy is within. We produce the enemy ourselves. We are the enemy. The enemy is active and the enemy is also passive.
The first duty of a government is not the economy. It is not education or health. The first duty of a government is to protect its citizens from harm and, above all, to protect their right to live.
Successive governments have failed to protect this right. The number of murders has been increasing steadily, for decades. For the last three years, we have been swimming in a sea of blood. The blood of our fellow citizens, who have been murdered to please the murderers or their employers has been flowing unceasingly recently, with great impunity because, the killers have not been brought to justice because, our administration of justice system is a total and abject failure.
We who have not been touched directly by the murders, live our lives and go about our daily business thinking there is nothing we can do about the situation. “It will get worse before it gets better,” is the philosophic observation. We haven’t got the sense yet, that it will not get better until we become involved in the resolve to put an end to this state of affairs. But, what can we do, you say. There isn’t anything we can do. It is the job of the government. Let them do their job or we will change them in two years time. How do you know another government will do any better? Have you ever heard any political party campaign on a platform to stamp out crime? I haven’t. Someone told me that organized crime could not exist without the knowledge and complicity of political leaders and, that there are rogue politicians of the Red and the Blue who have criminals to do their bidding. This may be so, but we have to be undeterred. We can stamp out murders as a first step to reducing crime in general, if we have the political will. By the political will, I mean the will to do what is necessary.
We can stamp out murder. I don’t mean homicide. I mean wilful, premeditated, cold-blooded murder. The Scriptures say it pollutes the land. My church says it cries out to heaven for vengeance. What hope is there for us as a people if we allow this state of affairs to continue? It can be done. Permit me to make a few suggestions.
First we have to organize a symposium of the church leaders, trade unions, Chamber of Commerce, the public services union, non-government organizations, the media houses, sporting associations and any other body which would like to participate. The purpose of the symposium is to decide on measures to be recommended to government for action. These measures should come out of the collective wisdom of the participants, our traditions and culture.
It would be like a meeting of the Estates General held in France before the French Revolution. It would be fitting, because we are in a crisis.
I put the churches at the head of the list because, they are concerned with the whole person, body and soul. Not all crimes are sins but, all violent crime, definitely, is. I know the church is comprised of the clergy and the laity, and church leaders are in the habit of pointing this out when they fail to lead. We are in a crisis and their influence is surely needed.
I don’t think the Bar Association should be invited to join the Symposium. After all, they are in the business of defending persons accused of crime. There are well-known, public spirited, patriotic and nationalistic attorneys. They should be invited individually.
I am an advocate of capital punishment as the appropriate punishment for murder. I think it is a proven deterrent to this crime. This penalty is on our law books, although the courts do not impose it anymore.
The reinstituting of capital punishment as the penalty for murder is the first step towards reducing the rate of this particular crime. Murder is murder, regardless of degree. The courts have been bending over backwards to protect accused persons from conviction. I think there is a need for lawmakers to prevent them from bending too far. It is in the interest of the nation, which should take precedence over all others.
It has been pointed out to me that the reinstitution of capital punishment is useless, as killers cannot be brought to justice because witnesses are intimidated or killed. This is supposed to be an insurmountable impediment to justice. Well, if the government shares this view, they resign. That would be saying that they are incapable to carry out their first duty. What to do about this is the first thing the Symposium would have to consider and make a recommendation to government to immediate action.
My position is that the intimidation of witnesses is a worse crime than murder. As terrible as it is, murder is a crime against one citizen. The intimidation of a witness is a crime against the whole nation-state, because it renders the state powerless to administer justice. It is treason and, should be tried separately and, before the trial of the murder the act sought to prevent. I have to ask, what should the penalty for this offense be? It depends upon whether or not we are serious about putting a stop to the behaviour.
I will end after asking my readers a question. In the Wednesday, 15th September 2010 issue of Amandala four murders in Belize City are reported, which took place on the same day, one of a child of eight who was sleeping in bed. My question is, will we wait until there are five or six or seven?