Dear Editor,
One of the effects of prison riots is that we are so intimidated by their occurrence that we turn our attention solely at considering what can be done immediately, to bring these occurrences to an end. Thus, we concentrate on training for prison officials, building bigger prisons etc.
Rarely do we look beyond the “smokescreen” to discern the real cause/s for prisoners growing discontent and preparedness to violently challenge authority. Not doing this, renders us incapable of thinking and planning, so as to reduce incidents of prison riots in the future.
Today it is popular for students of the social sciences to offer environmental reasons as the source of social problems. For most of us, the old debate about nature versus nurture is over. There is wide agreement that the environment is the main influence on our belief, value and behaviour.
This tendency has led to us, as a society, becoming more tolerant, humane towards criminals, who we now see as persons who are denied opportunity by an unequal system which condones the exploitation of the many by the few. Whether we agree with this perspective or not is not the issue for this letter. What is a fact is that this is a prevailing sentiment.
Seeing street crimes as a product of an unequal system has instilled in our young people a sense of being taken advantage of, of being wronged. This in turn makes them feel justified in taking any action to (as they would put it today) “get de oppressor knee off we neck.” Fighting authority therefore, becomes justified, a revolutionary act, a duty of those who are oppressed.
This perspective is not new. What is new is the extent to which it has taken root in every strata of society. The American sociologist David Greenberg says “it was not that the poor stole more, but rather that when they did, the police were more likely to arrest them.” Professor Raymond Michalowski says “we cannot be free from the crimes of the poor until there are no poor: we cannot be free from domination of the powerful until we reduce the inequalities that make domination possible ……….”
Closer to home the distinguished Jamaican criminologist Dr. Bernard Headley, speaking about street crime in Jamaica, says “The country’s troubled youths are not animals who were born wicked, evil or malicious. It is indeed the educated and the well-off, and the kind of society they built, who made them bad.”
Let’s remember that here in Guyana criminals involved in the prison break of 2002, armed themselves and described themselves as “freedom fighters.’ This view is echoed in popular culture. Check out the Mighty Sparrow’s song “Good Citizens.”
When such sentiments pervade can we really be surprised when criminals show little remorse, or shame? Wouldn’t being fed liberal servings of such teachings bolster a would-be criminal’s feeling of having been wronged by a wicked and oppressive ‘Babylon system,’ and therefore inclined to challenge authority? This is the undesired consequence of our modern, progressive thinking.
With this understanding, we are now in a better position to analyze the recent occurrences at the Lusignan prison and consider what this now popular perspective suggests that we consider doing in response to prison riots in these times.
Filled with a sense of having been wronged in the first place, criminals and suspected criminals, housed at the Lusignan prison made many demands, among these was that the minister with responsibility for prisons meet with them. To which the minister agreed and accompanied by the Minister of Health, met with the prisoners.
First, agreeing to such a meeting was a mistake. Such request from prisoners is nothing new. Listed among some of the most deadly prison riots recorded in recent times are those in the Philippines – 1989, where five missionaries visiting the prison were killed. New Mexico 1980- ended with thirty-three dead and New York 1971 in which 39 were killed. In all these cases prisoners made similar requests, all were refused.
In the eyes of prisoners, ministers agreeing to meet with them is seen as a show of weakness. This does not mean that no meeting with the prison population in its entirety is always advisable. It means that any such meeting must be carefully thought out and its absolute necessity ascertained. Otherwise, prisoners will continue to make such request, acquiescence to which will undermine the authority of the prison staff.
Meeting with that small group of representatives of prisoners should have sufficed. Notice, that when the ministers met first with a small group representing the prisoners, the meeting was said to have gone smoothly. It was when the ministers met with prisoners in a large group (Holding Bay One) that chaos broke out. A rudimentary understanding of group dynamics would have informed the ministers how emboldened people become when in large groups.
Second, we must bring an end to overcrowding at our prisons. In two previous letters I suggested that we consider using monitoring bracelets thus allowing for home confinement. I also suggested offering chemical castration to habitual rapists, as an alternative to imprisonment. The recent case in which the confessed serial rapist – age 23, was given 62 years imprisonment is a good example. Would it not make more sense to offer prisoners like him the alternative of subjecting themselves to chemical castration? Such an approach would reduce overcrowding, and the cost to the nation for their upkeep.
Third, we must take note of the experts when they say “restrictive measures, however appropriate must be accompanied by mitigating strategies to reduce the harm caused to people in custody.” Stabroek News of March 17th 2020 carries an article under caption – “Prison Service to curb visits as part of COVID–19 response.” This quote was attributed to the Director of Prisons.
While reducing visits might be a necessary “mitigating strategy,” to compensate for this loss, prisoners might be offered as an alternative, free calls and/or video visitation.
Fourth, be aware when prisoners are stocking up food in their cells. Stocking up food might be an indicating that they intend to refuse meals as part of their act of a protest in the future.
Fifth, do not allow prisoners to accumulate stacks of newspaper and magazine in their cells – this will reduce the amount of flammable material available to them for starting fires.
Fifth, most of all, we must resolve and work urgently and diligently to create a just and fair society. For it is true that until a just society is realized, one in which all are guaranteed a living wage, equal opportunity and equal treatment before the law, there will continue to be street crimes. And since it is the poor who end up in prisons, it is they who will populate same. Either we strive to end inequalities or we will have to constantly build new prisons, the choice is ours.
Yours faithfully,
Claudius Prince.
