Dear Editor,
It seems fair to say that a significant number of Guyanese are of the view that crime is rampant in the Republic and as a result they live in fear of becoming victims. To a large extent the frequent reporting on crime by the media – mostly print and television ‒ contributes substantially to the prevailing views on crime. The views expressed by leaders and influential groups and captured by the media send mixed messages. Regrettably which statistic is highlighted is influenced by the extent to which that particular statistic supports the narrative embraced by the presenting individual or group.
Thus the police as they seek to calm an anxious citizenry offer us statistics that suggest the crime rate in Guyana is on the decline. The government as would be expected, happily accepts the police statistics. However, conscious of the perception of the public that crime is increasing, government seeks to cover all bases and constantly shares with citizens its efforts at reducing the crime rate even further. Thus we hear about programmes tailored at enhancing the competence of the police, the functioning of the courts and the streamlining and increasing of rehabilitative programmes.
Interestingly, both the political opposition and some sectors of the church tend to embrace, whenever possible, alternative statistics reflecting that crime is on the increase. The opposition does this because it sees a rising crime rate as proof of the government’s failure to make Guyana safe. This, it feels, will enhance its chances of returning to power at the next general election. Some churches latch on to statistics suggesting that crime is on the rise, since it lends credence to their frequent claim that sin covers the land and that we are living in what it sees as “end times.”
Editor, while it is clear that these interest groups use statistics to satisfy their various purposes, citizens must be aware that the careless use of statistics is a dangerous thing. Strictly speaking at the national level statistics are intended to help the authorities draw accurate conclusions about a phenomenon, thus allowing decision-makers to ascertain whether a problem exists or not. Statistics allow government to craft informed response to the challenges facing the society. Playing foolish and self-serving games with crime statistics is not in the nation’s best interest. Thus knowing what the considerations are which we need to contemplate when presented with crime statistics is of extreme importance.
At the outset we need to appreciate that dependency on police records to offer us a sense of the level of crime in the country is misplaced. In Guyana we know that some victims do not report their victimization because they do not trust the police to take action. In criminology there is the concept of “the dark figure of crime.” This theory simply holds that there are more unreported crimes in society than there are reported and/or recorded ones and that not all crimes that are reported to the police are recorded. To appreciate this point let us recall the young lady who recently claimed she was molested by a dentist she had gone to for medical service. She reported the incident to the police and was reprimanded and ignored by some female officers, with one telling her “if de doctor was young yuh wouldna complain.” Now if the young lady did not seek legal counsel the chances are this reported crime would not have been recorded, since no action was taken by the police.
Next we need to be sure when making statistical comparisons with another jurisdiction that they both compare record crimes similarly. The FBI’s definition of rape only includes female victims. When FBI figures are compared with that of jurisdictions where such acts against males are included in the classification a wide difference in the number of rapes will be indicated.
Small countries like Guyana add some intriguing twists that show how unreliable police statistics can be. Often crime figures for a given year indicate that Georgetown tends to have a higher level of crime than Berbice or Essequibo. However for a number of reasons this might not accurately reflect the true situation. In rural Berbice villagers tend to know each other and enjoy good relationships. If a youngster enters a neighbour’s house and steals, on finding out the victim is very likely to complain to the thief’s parents, restitution is made and the matter forgotten. There is no report made to the police, thus no crime is recorded. In Georgetown it would be handled differently. In Georgetown it is not uncommon for persons not to know who lives two houses away. Contact is very often limited to a nod at accidental encounters. In parts of Georgetown there is, relatively speaking, an absence of a sense of community, thus resort to the justice system to adjudicate matters is much more frequent.
Further I remember some years ago a Minister of Education on a visit to a rural village found, to the shock of the nation, that child marriage still existed. When interviewed villagers admitted knowing of these occurrences, but the police had no report of same. Such behaviour is unlikely in the capital. In the capital citizens from different ethnic groups are pressed together. It is easy for behaviour such as child marriages, to offend at least one of these ethnic groups, causing them to speak out and thus eventually attract the attention of the authorities. Therefore, with no regard to context it would be ill-advised to compare crime statistics from the USA with those of Guyana in an attempt to credit or debit Guyana on its level of crime. So Guyana needs professionals who will be conscious, take on board the above comments and help it make sense of crime statistics. This brings us to the role of the University of Guyana.
If indeed as a nation, we need dependable statistics on a wide range of issues to inform policy and programmes intended to deliver to our people the good life, we will have to make an investment. I submit that we need to strengthen the University of Guyana. Not only do we need to have a better library and qualified lecturers, we also need this institution to lead the way in research. Research that would be as I noted before, credible and reliable. This means employing experienced and competent researchers, and having the ability to keep them. This means a significant improvement in remuneration. Recently I saw an advertisement inviting applications for a job at the University of Guyana. The advertisement described the job as a senior staff position, but the salary offered can only be described as a sick joke. There is no way the University of Guyana will attract in significant numbers, and be able to hold competent persons with senior degrees when offering staff such ridiculous salaries.
Editor, the government is likely to agree with the above. It would likely claim to be a people’s government and would do more for UG if resources were available. Sadly, as much as we support this government such claims ring hollow in the face of its recent behaviour. Soon after assuming office last year government demonstrated the capacity to give itself substantial increases in salaries, while denying those depending on pensions a 5% raise if their pension exceeded a mere $25000. Such behaviour is no show of concern for the poor, no way to support claims of funds not being available.
In the end we have to appreciate the extent to which Guyana’s development is dependent on what is happening at UG. There is too much serious work to be done by this institution, and its stock of persons with the required experience, knowledge and skills is frighteningly low; the bleeding has to stop.
Yours faithfully,
Claudius Prince
