Tweet
Lets appoint Mosiah Provost Mashall of the House and get the job done.
The American case against Jamaican officials
Published: Wednesday | June 9, 2010 0 Comments and 0 Reactions
Alexander Britell, Contributor IN SEPTEMBER 2009, the [COLOR=orange !important][COLOR=orange !important]United [COLOR=orange !important]States[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] of America (US) made an extradition request to [COLOR=orange !important][COLOR=orange !important]Jamaica[/COLOR][/COLOR] for West Kingston strongman Christopher 'Dudus' Coke. According to the terms of the treaty, the US was within its right to ask Jamaica for its help with a problem it felt had crossed the Atlantic onto American soil. In the nearly nine months since the request was made, a dangerous, but manageable diplomatic exchange became the instrument that sent Jamaica into one of its greatest crises in a generation.
Now, what was the abject disregard of an extradition request has made the rule of law a stranger in Jamaica. With the country in a state of emergency, and an indefinitely longer state of uncertainty, fingers are being pointed and questions raised. Those responsible must be held to account for one of the bloodiest eras in Jamaica's history as an independent nation. And the blame goes to those at the highest levels.
It is hard to argue that granting the request in August 2009, when this was merely a quiet affair, would not have prevented the boil that has occurred in the interim. Even in August last year, there were reports that Tivoli Gardens had been tense at the news of the US request. If the neighbourhood was merely warming up then, can it really be argued that a nine-month wait did anything to cool it down?
The Manatt Phillips, Phelps fiasco was the direct result of a cruel cocktail of hubris, ineptitude and an apparently strong belief that defying the US' request was actually in the national interest. Clearly, the officials involved were aware of the risks of trying to enter Tivoli and its potential repercussions, and must have known that waiting, and inflaming a delicate situation, would not make things any easier for Jamaica.
But the conduct of officials throughout the process was not just unseemly - it may have been illegal.
There were almost certainly misrepresen-tations on the foreign agent registration that originated the lobbying, and while the decision to delay extradition was a political one, the means by which it occurred could have involved violations of US law, specifically, the Foreign Agent Registration Act. Some have predicted a US indictment in the future for those involved. While it would likely be unprecedented, given the stakes of what has occurred, it would not be altogether surprising - or unreasonable for overseas officials to be indicted. While blood still runs in the streets of Kingston, accountability must be taken.
Extending the hand of justice
Caribbean officials have been held to account extraterritorially before - from US v Noriega, where Manuel Noriega was indicted and arrested in Panama, to US v. Saunders, where several officials of the [COLOR=orange !important][COLOR=orange !important]Turks [COLOR=orange !important]and [/COLOR][COLOR=orange !important]Caicos[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] were indicted and arrested by US officials for their roles in a transnational drug trade. While the [COLOR=orange !important][COLOR=orange !important]Turks [COLOR=orange !important]and [/COLOR][COLOR=orange !important]Caicos[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] officials were arrested on US soil, and Noriega was captured in a state of war in Panama, it cannot be ignored that the US readily extended the hand of justice across the [COLOR=orange !important][COLOR=orange !important]Caribbean [COLOR=orange !important]Sea[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR], blind to the particular gown of the guilty.
There is also a domestic remedy. The nearly ancient punishment called contempt of parliament, which can mean temporary imprisonment in the chambers of parliament for those who, inter alia, make misrepresentations to the legislature, is an option for courageous members ready to vote for accountability. The remedy is not limited to non-parliamentarians, and is indeed wielded with some frequency by fellow Common-wealth member Canada. This would be a not subtle herald to those responsible: do what you were voted to do in the first place, or resign and yield to those who would.
Tragic error
Whatever the merits for delay, and they are extremely difficult to discern, it is clear that the way it was handled was a tragic error. The back-room, underhanded way in which it was sought to circumvent the strong position of the US did not betray any kind of legitimate argument. Instead, the public welfare of Jamaica was mortgaged on white-collar legal stationery that likely could have been a violation of US law.
The extradition controversy turned what should have been a relatively quiet affair; a delicate situation into a disaster, and instead put Jamaica on the world's stage in a role it never should have played. Prosecution may be without forebear, but it would not be unmerited, or unwelcome.
Alexander Britell is a student in the Caribbean Law program at the University of Miami School of Law and a cum laude graduate of Harvard College.
The American case against Jamaican officials
Published: Wednesday | June 9, 2010 0 Comments and 0 Reactions
Alexander Britell, Contributor IN SEPTEMBER 2009, the [COLOR=orange !important][COLOR=orange !important]United [COLOR=orange !important]States[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] of America (US) made an extradition request to [COLOR=orange !important][COLOR=orange !important]Jamaica[/COLOR][/COLOR] for West Kingston strongman Christopher 'Dudus' Coke. According to the terms of the treaty, the US was within its right to ask Jamaica for its help with a problem it felt had crossed the Atlantic onto American soil. In the nearly nine months since the request was made, a dangerous, but manageable diplomatic exchange became the instrument that sent Jamaica into one of its greatest crises in a generation.
Now, what was the abject disregard of an extradition request has made the rule of law a stranger in Jamaica. With the country in a state of emergency, and an indefinitely longer state of uncertainty, fingers are being pointed and questions raised. Those responsible must be held to account for one of the bloodiest eras in Jamaica's history as an independent nation. And the blame goes to those at the highest levels.
It is hard to argue that granting the request in August 2009, when this was merely a quiet affair, would not have prevented the boil that has occurred in the interim. Even in August last year, there were reports that Tivoli Gardens had been tense at the news of the US request. If the neighbourhood was merely warming up then, can it really be argued that a nine-month wait did anything to cool it down?
The Manatt Phillips, Phelps fiasco was the direct result of a cruel cocktail of hubris, ineptitude and an apparently strong belief that defying the US' request was actually in the national interest. Clearly, the officials involved were aware of the risks of trying to enter Tivoli and its potential repercussions, and must have known that waiting, and inflaming a delicate situation, would not make things any easier for Jamaica.
But the conduct of officials throughout the process was not just unseemly - it may have been illegal.
There were almost certainly misrepresen-tations on the foreign agent registration that originated the lobbying, and while the decision to delay extradition was a political one, the means by which it occurred could have involved violations of US law, specifically, the Foreign Agent Registration Act. Some have predicted a US indictment in the future for those involved. While it would likely be unprecedented, given the stakes of what has occurred, it would not be altogether surprising - or unreasonable for overseas officials to be indicted. While blood still runs in the streets of Kingston, accountability must be taken.
Extending the hand of justice
Caribbean officials have been held to account extraterritorially before - from US v Noriega, where Manuel Noriega was indicted and arrested in Panama, to US v. Saunders, where several officials of the [COLOR=orange !important][COLOR=orange !important]Turks [COLOR=orange !important]and [/COLOR][COLOR=orange !important]Caicos[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] were indicted and arrested by US officials for their roles in a transnational drug trade. While the [COLOR=orange !important][COLOR=orange !important]Turks [COLOR=orange !important]and [/COLOR][COLOR=orange !important]Caicos[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] officials were arrested on US soil, and Noriega was captured in a state of war in Panama, it cannot be ignored that the US readily extended the hand of justice across the [COLOR=orange !important][COLOR=orange !important]Caribbean [COLOR=orange !important]Sea[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR], blind to the particular gown of the guilty.
There is also a domestic remedy. The nearly ancient punishment called contempt of parliament, which can mean temporary imprisonment in the chambers of parliament for those who, inter alia, make misrepresentations to the legislature, is an option for courageous members ready to vote for accountability. The remedy is not limited to non-parliamentarians, and is indeed wielded with some frequency by fellow Common-wealth member Canada. This would be a not subtle herald to those responsible: do what you were voted to do in the first place, or resign and yield to those who would.
Tragic error
Whatever the merits for delay, and they are extremely difficult to discern, it is clear that the way it was handled was a tragic error. The back-room, underhanded way in which it was sought to circumvent the strong position of the US did not betray any kind of legitimate argument. Instead, the public welfare of Jamaica was mortgaged on white-collar legal stationery that likely could have been a violation of US law.
The extradition controversy turned what should have been a relatively quiet affair; a delicate situation into a disaster, and instead put Jamaica on the world's stage in a role it never should have played. Prosecution may be without forebear, but it would not be unmerited, or unwelcome.
Alexander Britell is a student in the Caribbean Law program at the University of Miami School of Law and a cum laude graduate of Harvard College.
Comment