Tweet
... Muadib Ben Jammi, Leaflet Lazie & Co... tune up unnuself....nuff spinnin will be required in the next few weeks 
EDITORIAL - For The Coke Enquiry Report To Be Relevant
Published: Monday | June 13, 2011
Today, we have been told, Prime Minister Bruce Golding and his ministers will review the report of the commission of enquiry into his administration's bungled handling of America's request for the extradition of reputed drug lord Christopher Coke, including the hiring of lobbyists to persuade the US to go soft on the demand that Jamaica hand over Coke.
Tomorrow, according to the information minister, Mr Daryl Vaz, the report is to be tabled in Parliament.
Jamaicans, both at home and abroad, are looking forward to the publication of this report which, depending on its findings and recommendations, could have profound significance for the quality of governance in our country.
The commissioners, Mr Emil George, the chairman; Mr Donald Scharschmidt; and Mr Anthony Irons, would also be aware that their reputations are also at stake.
It is useful, we think, to be reminded of the context in which this commission was established.
Coke, who the Americans say smuggled narcotics into their country and ran guns to Jamaica, was close to the governing Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) and was involved in companies that got state contracts. He operated from Tivoli Gardens, a JLP enclave in Prime Minister Golding's West Kingston parliamentary constituency, and ran the community like a private fiefdom.
When the Americans requested his extradition, the Government stalled for nine months, offering various legal arguments as to why the request was flawed. In-between, the JLP, it is said, hired lobbyists, but there was clear mingling between the party's private efforts and the State's business in this matter.
When civil-society pressure finally drove the Government to hand over Coke, his private militia gathered in his Tivoli redoubt to resist the security forces and challenge the State, a fight that left 74 persons dead, among them one soldier.
corruptly handled
The public therefore will, against this backdrop, judge the relevance of this report on how well, and with what logic, it answers the question of whether, as has been suggested in some quarters, the extradition was corruptly handled, and if public officials systematically lied to the Jamaican people about the whole affair.
Jamaicans hope, too, that the report does not leave unresolved, or treat with insignificance, the matter of who paid the bill for the lobbyists, and was committed to pay more had the contract not been aborted at the height of the controversy.
It would be tragic, we believe, if it required the next instalment of US diplomatic cables from WikiLeaks for Jamaicans to glean credible information on this saga, including the behaviour of public officials. Already, WikiLeaks information might have caused official adjustments in the timeline, and possibly how the commissioners framed their report, of when Prime Minister Golding knew of America's intention to seek Coke's extradition.
Whatever the conclusions the commissioners may have arrived at, the enquiry had at least one positive outcome: the fact that people saw their leaders being cross-examined suggested that they were accountable, and that was good for democracy.
Mr Golding will build on this value if his substantive response to the commission's findings comes not from a party platform, but a national forum.
EDITORIAL - For The Coke Enquiry Report To Be Relevant
Published: Monday | June 13, 2011
Today, we have been told, Prime Minister Bruce Golding and his ministers will review the report of the commission of enquiry into his administration's bungled handling of America's request for the extradition of reputed drug lord Christopher Coke, including the hiring of lobbyists to persuade the US to go soft on the demand that Jamaica hand over Coke.
Tomorrow, according to the information minister, Mr Daryl Vaz, the report is to be tabled in Parliament.
Jamaicans, both at home and abroad, are looking forward to the publication of this report which, depending on its findings and recommendations, could have profound significance for the quality of governance in our country.
The commissioners, Mr Emil George, the chairman; Mr Donald Scharschmidt; and Mr Anthony Irons, would also be aware that their reputations are also at stake.
It is useful, we think, to be reminded of the context in which this commission was established.
Coke, who the Americans say smuggled narcotics into their country and ran guns to Jamaica, was close to the governing Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) and was involved in companies that got state contracts. He operated from Tivoli Gardens, a JLP enclave in Prime Minister Golding's West Kingston parliamentary constituency, and ran the community like a private fiefdom.
When the Americans requested his extradition, the Government stalled for nine months, offering various legal arguments as to why the request was flawed. In-between, the JLP, it is said, hired lobbyists, but there was clear mingling between the party's private efforts and the State's business in this matter.
When civil-society pressure finally drove the Government to hand over Coke, his private militia gathered in his Tivoli redoubt to resist the security forces and challenge the State, a fight that left 74 persons dead, among them one soldier.
corruptly handled
The public therefore will, against this backdrop, judge the relevance of this report on how well, and with what logic, it answers the question of whether, as has been suggested in some quarters, the extradition was corruptly handled, and if public officials systematically lied to the Jamaican people about the whole affair.
Jamaicans hope, too, that the report does not leave unresolved, or treat with insignificance, the matter of who paid the bill for the lobbyists, and was committed to pay more had the contract not been aborted at the height of the controversy.
It would be tragic, we believe, if it required the next instalment of US diplomatic cables from WikiLeaks for Jamaicans to glean credible information on this saga, including the behaviour of public officials. Already, WikiLeaks information might have caused official adjustments in the timeline, and possibly how the commissioners framed their report, of when Prime Minister Golding knew of America's intention to seek Coke's extradition.
Whatever the conclusions the commissioners may have arrived at, the enquiry had at least one positive outcome: the fact that people saw their leaders being cross-examined suggested that they were accountable, and that was good for democracy.
Mr Golding will build on this value if his substantive response to the commission's findings comes not from a party platform, but a national forum.
Comment