Dear Editor,
Recent reports on: (1) the murder of popular gold miner Mr. Zaheer Mohammed Sheriff and his worker Mr. Donavan Washington at Arimu Backdam in Region 7 while they were transporting gold; (2) the brutal killing (chopping) of Mr David Gomes and his mother Elizabeth Gomes allegedly over a land dispute at Saxacalli, Region 7; and (3) the killing of security guard Paul Waterman in a supermarket at Vreed-en-Hoop, West Coast Demerara during a robbery attack on March 11th have all provided another opportunity for the Ministry of Home Affairs to elevate crime to the centre of the political radar.
A review of official reports on serious crimes (covering the decades of 1990s, 2000s and 2010s) shows a fluctuating pattern. For example, the average annual incidence of crime in the 1990s was 4,844; for 2000s, it declined by 36.3% to 3,085; and it rose by 89.9% in 2010s to 5,860. In 2022, the incidence of crime was 4,151. However, there was a significant anomaly during 2014, when there was an astronomical increase in crime which more than doubled (2.6 times) the 2013 incidents.
Larceny accounted for most (80%) of this super steep rise in 2014. It was the first time ever that the incidence of larceny exceeded “burglary and break and enter” offences. Why this dramatic upsurge in larceny? Did it have any connection with the prevailing political instability (deemed a political crisis by VOA) that manifested itself in the Parliamentary gridlock as well as reflected in an Opposition’s No Confidence Motion that was tabled in Parliament against the Donald Ramoutar PPPC government in November 2014?
The fashionable thing that policy makers and law enforcers say is “the level of crime in this 1st quarter is lower than the previous year’s 1st quarter.” While this statement might be accurate, that would not, however, give any comfort to victims’ families, nor does it improve the public’s confidence in the law enforcement capability to protect them. The World Economic Forum (WEF) states that the 3 most important responsibilities of a government are to “protect, provide and invest.”
People’s nerves have been rattled when several men armed with high-powered rifles opened fire on a group of people at Mandela Avenue and Princess Street, Georgetown. And the public’s confidence was further shaken when police sergeant Alex Vaugh was shot in the pursuit of prison escapee Akeem Wong, a prime suspect in the Gomes double murder.
What is also critical to note is that the public‘s reaction to crime varies according to the modus operandi, who are the perpetrators, who are the victims, and the gravity of the offence. To put it simply, one ‘crime’ could have greater negative impact on society than several others combined. So, any assessment on the incidence of crime must take into consideration the varying societal impacts.
The murders referred to above were in relation to the theft of property. Other murders are driven by jealousy, revenge, turf battle (drugs), anger (rage), or mental incapacity. Social adaptation has failed to tame the instinctual desires and negative emotions (generated by alienation and relative deprivation) of people who are further tempted by the growing opportunities associated with an expanding economy.
Murders and other crimes committed could be classified as either impulsive or planned. The former category (e.g., rage and jealousy), by its very nature (unplanned), has a higher rate of detection and successful prosecution. The latter category (e.g., property, revenge, turf battle) being planned, has a lower rate of detection and prosecution.
The disparity in sentencing is well known, and the Government is moving to reduce this through the implementation of sentencing guidelines. Other reforms, like ‘alternative dispute resolution’ (arbitration) and ‘plea bargaining’, as part of the Criminal Procedures Bill, were tabled in Parliament in 2023. Apart from improving the administration of justice, would these measures also reduce the level of crime? Would the death penalty be the subject of ongoing law reform? There has been no judicial execution since August 1997. If a law exists, why not enforce it? If not, discard it! Both sides of the death penalty debate have good points.
While re-socialization or rehabilitation is a long-term solution, for the short-term, what is needed is firm enforcement. The logical question is: “would firm law enforcement conflict with the notion of restorative justice?” For now, my basic contention is that since Government alone cannot control crime, they must also reach out to various stakeholders to get their inputs. One such powerful medium is to tap into the proceedings of a National Conference on Crime and the Penal System, where opinions and facts could be disseminated and crystallized, and then incorporated into crime fighting policies/strategies.
