Tweet
Gentle Dorothy and political realities
Mark Wignall
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Mark Wignall
Thursday, March 10, 2011
HAD it been a Disney classic or National Geographic in HD, the towering figure of ace advocate KD Knight would easily have claimed the role of alpha male. Stubbornly uncompromising, at each juncture he would demand his primacy "NOW" while lesser mortals willingly occupied slots further down the food chain.
At the same time and in the same circumstances, Senator Dorothy Lightbourne, attorney general and justice minister, would be everyone's grandmother, with a facial expression that invited all to love her. She would be the listening ear and the inviting arms into whose folds one could bury one's woes.
LIGHTBOURNE... must first taxi down the runway
LIGHTBOURNE... must first taxi down the runway
LIGHTBOURNE... must first taxi down the runway
At 3:05 pm on Monday at the Manatt Enquiry when the long-anticipated face-off between them began, harsh political realities intruded on our theatrical dreams. In the time preceding the cross-examination by lawyer for the PNP KD Knight, in answers to friendly questions from her lawyer Dr Lloyd Barnett and advocate for the JLP, Frank Phipps, she had tried to establish essentially three points.
First, others unconnected to her ministry were subtly pushing her to rush through the extradition of Christopher "Dudus" Coke. Second, she had to satisfy herself that Mr Coke's constitutional rights were not breached. Third, Mr Coke was wrongfully extradited, but she eventually signed the order due to widespread national (and international?) pressure and in the interest of public order.
Of course, it is always good to know that our government is so open, upfront and willing to face-off with the giant USA in defending the constitutional rights of our people, especially upstanding citizen, Michael Christopher "Dudus" Coke.
At 10:50 am on Tuesday when, in answer to a question from Knight about emails, the minister informed the commission (and the nation) that she does not know how to send e-mails, a minor spat broke out in my household. Chupski was leaving for her place of business when we both heard the revelation.
"What!" I shouted. "The attorney general cannot send an email! What madness is this?" I exclaimed.
"So, what's the big deal?" said Chupski. "Does KD Knight have to go into that?"
I turned to her and smiled. "Are you serious, honey? She is a minister of government, not a private citizen who has not yet caught up with a long-established technological tool."
She shot back with, "You are not even on Facebook." I laughed then told her that I had reluctantly joined but found the social networking site nauseatingly boring and riddled with trivia. As she left, she could be heard saying, "KD must ease off, man. That is Senator Lightbourne's business."
I do not know KD Knight, but I once had a telephone conversation with him probably about seven years ago. I have had one face-to-face meeting with Senator Lightbourne. She is extremely likeable.
I do not know KD Knight, but I once had a telephone conversation with him probably about seven years ago. I have had one face-to-face meeting with Senator Lightbourne. She is extremely likeable.
In the maze which the enquiry has to traverse, it has been conveniently lost on us that in selected instances, involving Jamaica and transnational criminality, we have been either unwilling or incapable of policing ourselves.
In listening to all of the players who have so far testified, it is obvious to me that the Americans had done their homework. Although they are never far from the big-stick approach in their overall foreign policy, best exemplified by Henry Kissinger in the 1970s -- "America has no friends, only interests" - in the extradition request for Dudus, the US would have been aware of the close links he had with the administration operating then -- the JLP.
It seems to me that in the specific instance of the Dudus request, being au fait with the local situation, the American authorities involved as many of our agencies as possible in an effort to ensure that the request did not "fall through the cracks".
Even if we were to assume (as the JLP has mouthed) that the MOUs signed by Peter Phillips, former security minister in the last PNP administration, was in breach of the Interception of Communications Act, what guarantee do we have that had we utilised the powers under that Act, the data gathered would not have died on the vine or ended up in Tivoli Gardens?
As grandmotherly and loveable as Dorothy Lightbourne is, she was not placed in her post to spread love on us. At the enquiry sittings, the JLP has done the attorney general and justice minister a disservice by flanking her with heavyweights and lightweights in the JLP - Pearnel Charles, Babsy Grange, Bobby Montague and others -- as if she is an endangered species. In addition, in opting not to face the man who many have dubbed as her "nemesis" (they are both senators on opposite sides of the Upper House), she seems unwilling or afraid to stare him in the eyes. Instead, she faces the chair and addresses her answers to "Mr Chairman".
It is bad PR, because it makes her appear to be an individual needing all the moral support that she can get. What message will that send to the nation? That she is quite capable on her own?
Politics has never been for doves, because doves are much too easy prey for hawks and eagles. On the other hand, KD Knight, love him or hate him, is hawkish in the job he has at hand - that of being the legal eagle for the PNP. Let us understand that if the situation was reversed and it was the PNP under fire, the JLP would unleash the best advocate it could find to rip into the innards of the PNP and its representatives.
Amazingly, with at least four senior people in the JLP who held positions either in Central Executive or Standing Committee who have given testimony, not a single one has said that he or she was aware that the JLP had engaged the services of Manatt, Phelps and Phillips. Was the JLP at some stage a party of one, or is it that the memories have faded?
Women will always be protective of each other in the face of fire from the male of the species. I have found that in that process they will even suspend rational thinking. It could be that what we men define as "rational thinking" is far outweighed by a woman's need to draw heavily on her emotional intelligence in making all judgements. Still, we love them not only because the alternative is quite scary and distasteful to consider, but many times it is that very emotion that is used to temper the force of our "rational thinking".
Today I would want my attorney general and justice minister to face up to the stealth fighter attack aircraft that KD Knight is. For her to do that she will first need to taxi down the runway. So far, she seems not to have left the safety of the hangar.
observemark@gmail.com
observemark@gmail.com