The Tivoli Enquiry: An Interesting Commentary... Excerpts taken from an article posted by Gordon Robinson in the Gleaner, Sunday 30th March 2014 Sometimes I believe that if the Peoples National Party (PNP) hadnt appointed Velma Hylton to the Tivoli enquiry, the JLP wouldve done it. One certainty is theres only one political party with anything to fear from this commission. Dudus extradition fiasco cost the JLP a general election and it must feel an eerie sense of déjà vu as the PNP organises to air JLP dirty linen in public all over again, rehashing every painfully embarrassing detail under the guise of an enquiry into the Tivoli Massacre. So, whats a poor, underappreciated political party to do? Clearly, it must pray for a suitable red herring to help block or delay the bitter medicine. Enter stage left, Velma Hylton. If the PNP hadnt appointed her, the JLP mightve considered lobbying behind the scenes to have her appointed as the required diversion. Phantom bias card So, its all hands on deck as the phantom bias card is played and replayed. Confusion is spread like wildfire. Nobody appears willing to grasp the fundamentals, so even the Pinochet case is trotted out to hammer home the point that only the appearance of bias is enough. One more time: WHAT BIAS? The point here isnt the standard of proof (appearance enough); its the absence of anything to prove. To be a judge in your own cause, you must somehow be connected to the commissions cause. To quote from In Pinochets head note: It is said that Velma Hylton is connected to NOTHING except a submission made 12 years ago which was arguable then and is arguable now. Whats unfolding before you is a beautiful game of political knockout football between teams with the analogous winning chances of Chelsea versus Yeoville. The men from Yeoville, underdogs from the word go, but hell-bent on creating an upset, need more than football skills to win. They need to disrupt Chelseas play. Terms of reference So, the PNP begins this political football game with every advantage and has scored from the kick-off. The very first term of reference reads: 1 To enquire into: the situation in Western Kingston and related areas ... prior to the attempt to execute a provisional warrant in extradition proceedings relating to Christopher Dudus Coke ... . ROFL! What does the situation in Tivoli prior to the attempt have to do with an enquiry into the conduct of any government agency or official (which is all a commission of enquiry can do)? Which government department, agency or official resided in Tivoli? WE WANT TO KNOW WHY THE SECURITY FORCES INVADED AND WHY THEY KILLED 76 PEOPLE. Their responses might include that they felt obliged to invade because of the situation in Western Kingston ... prior to the attempt to execute a provisional warrant ..., including that Tivoli was barricaded. Let them introduce and explain THAT piece of brilliant military strategy rather than directing the commission to start making ultra vires enquiries into Tivolis circumstances. What we want to know is the prior situation at Jamaica House. Why was the decision to sign the warrant broadcast publicly hours in advance, thereby making it impossible to be peacefully executed? The second term of reference: 2 ... Whether, and, if so, under what circumstances, state officials and law-enforcement officers came under gunfire attacks during May 2010 ... . Why are we assuming this might have been so? Why dont we simply enquire into what Jamaicans want to know, which is, WHY DID THE SECURITY FORCES INVADE AND WHY DID THEY KILL 76 PEOPLE. Let them explain they were shot at, if thats their story. The third term of reference: 3 The circumstances under which, and by whom, several police stations and other state property (including police or military vehicles) were attacked ... . This is insane. No commission has jurisdiction to comply with these last two terms of reference. This is police work. How can commissioners enquire and pronounce from a conference room on anybodys guilt or innocence regarding allegations of arson, shooting with intent or whatever? Which government department is accused of this? Not until the fourth term of reference do we get to the sole justification for this commission: 4 The conduct of operations by the security forces of Jamaica in Tivoli Gardens and related areas during the state of emergency ... . Thats it. Thats all. One term of reference required. The rest is pusillanimous politicking bearing no resemblance to a genuine commission of enquiry. If the JLP was a serious Opposition instead of a poppyshow, theyd immediately focus on the terms of reference as the object of its attack. Instead, they insist on the standard Jamaican political response of tracing. The PNP handed them Velma and they took the bait with mouths agape. Now, Velmas gone but the commission and the prejudicial terms of reference remain.
Posted on: Sun, 30 Mar 2014 12:15:35 +0000
Trending Topics
© 2015