Dear Editor,
I am disgusted at constantly reading in the local newspapers about politicians, the business community and persons described as criminal justice professionals offering criminal justice reform as the vehicle for eliminating crime. The criminal justice system has its place in our overall fight against crime, however it was never designed or intended to respond to the root cause of crime. A criminal justice approach to crime at best achieves a fluctuation in crime over a given period, and this is true for every country in the world that has embraced the criminal justice approach to crime-fighting.
Why we continue to offer citizens this criminal justice approach to eliminating crime is confounding especially when we read in the press (2013) that more young people are turning to sex work because of economic circumstances; Guyana has a recidivist rate of between 75 -80% (2015); an unemployed teen bandit is remorseful and says he has to support family (2017); and the crime chief saying that new gangs have taken the place of several others that the police had disbanded (2017). These reports seem to scream to us the inability of the justice system to eliminate crime. So, the questions for us is if not the justice system, what is to be done? And in our desire to eliminate or significantly reduce its occurrence what can we learn from the experiences of other countries?
On several occasions, I have made it clear that I identify with the argument that the environment is the main contributor to street and violent crimes in Guyana. Indeed, where these crimes are concerned the clear majority of offenders come from depressed parts of the city and its outskirts. These areas are known for their elevated level of unemployment and underemployment, dysfunctional families and a sense of powerlessness among inhabitants. Street crimes are generally being undertaken to satisfy material needs. From the young men who, at gunpoint rob businessmen, to those robbing their fellow poor who seem to be doing a little better materially, to the soldiers caught stealing milk. These acts have been mostly undertaken to satisfy the material needs of self and loved ones.
Seemingly in support of my above contention sociologists Judith and Peter Blau found that a significant proportion of all murders committed in metropolitan America are related to income inequalities. Further, criminologist Elliott Currie concludes “increasing equality goes hand in hand with lower risks of homicide.” So, in the absence of a more equitable division of wealth in Guyana, achieved by the presence of a mixture of well-paying jobs, social policy and programmes designed to offset the effects of debilitating poverty, there will be street crimes. But poverty and income inequalities have negative effects on the poor beyond the inability to satisfy the material needs of self and family. The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights says this: “Poverty is not simply a lack of adequate income. It is a multi-dimensional phenomenon that extends beyond the economic arena to encompass factors such as the inability to participate in social and political life.” In other words, poverty is also tied to other issues of social justice. So, when poverty gives rise to voicelessness, disrespect, and the perception of citizens as only having relevance to the political process on election day, then social justice is absent. As criminologists are inclined to remind us, persons who have a sense of their importance are unlikely to commit street crime. When, for example, the poor see their role in the nation’s politics as merely voters every five years, we are signalling to them our disrespect for them and this gives rise to resentment. And, as the Jamaican criminologist Dr Headley observed, “resentment has a way of developing into acrimony and bitterness, and a general sense of unfeeling attitude.”
Editor, it should not miss our attention that of the 10 countries with the lowest level of crime based on figures at May 2014, five are Nordic countries, where there is significant concern for the equitable distribution of wealth. Indeed, in Iceland, for example, a survey concluded, “There is virtually no difference among the upper, middle and lower class in Iceland.” The study further stated that only 1.5% of Icelanders saw themselves as lower class. Iceland’s homicide rate between 1999-2009 never went beyond 1.8 per 100,000 (Denmark has a homicide rate of 0.1). Perhaps, most interesting for us in Caricom is the fact that between 1944, when Iceland gained its independence and 2013 (a period of 69 years) there was only 1 police shooting in the country. While, in Jamaica from January 1 to early March 2017 the police have already killed 30 citizens. What has led these Nordic countries to continuously score impressively among nations with the lowest crime rate? Researchers point to the fact that these countries’ social welfare and education systems promote an egalitarian culture which is the product of their people’s high sense of community.
Indeed, outside of the Nordic countries, Japan is also a country in which street crime is “almost unheard of.” Coupled with its economic prosperity the same observation has been made about Japan: its people have an intense sense of community. This seems to be suggesting that where there is an intense sense of community crime (street and violent crimes) is low. Now this is an important observation. If we accept this argument then as Guyanese we must ask ourselves a couple of questions. For example, what happened in Guyana that led to a deterioration in our sense of community? And importantly, what can be done to revitalize this sense of community among our people?
Yours faithfully,
Claudius Prince
