Constitutional Reform Not Connecting

It is said that the constitution of the 1962 Independence process was ‘not by the Jamaicans and not for the Jamaicans’, but rather a borrowed concept from our colonial masters to smoothen our transition to an independent nation.

Fast forward to 2023, and thus far this Constitutional Reform process can be described as ‘by some Jamaican people and for some Jamaican people’, with the roadmap and phases of implementation already decided upon without much input as to what the collective mass would deem as priority or how they would like to see the process unfold.

 

An accepted notion amongst Jamaicans is that those within parliament are there because ‘they know best’ and are the brightest, they should formulate the laws or policy, debate, and vote on those laws while regular citizens should complain about issues and vote in elections. This upsetting misconception may have been appropriate in a fledgling democracy finding its footing but has no place in a maturing modern democratic nation.

 

If we were true to the principles of Democracy and the Westminster model of government then the people would be at the core of this Constitutional Reform process from conceptualization to implementation and resolution. It is wholly unfair to the people of Jamaica and specifically the youth, that the Government of Jamaica had decided to embark on a path of reform without first having the sort of inclusive discussions they are now seeking to have now. The renewal or refreshing of previous works done by commissions that existed decades ago would have been of vital importance to any administration that truly understands the impact of such a momentous change on future generations.

It also doesn’t help that the Constitutional Reform Committee seemed to have public education and communication as an afterthought. In a world of AI and TikTok, a communications strategy should have been developing prior to the formation of the CRC, seeing that the Government had the implementation approach in mind.

The CRC must resist the “token participation” tactics of that is only seen to be transparent and accepting of feedback but in practice, the policy is already set.

 

We all know distrust in government is high due to low transparency therefore It is crucial for this Constitutional Reform process to be open and inclusive at every step of the way.

 

At the end we must have a constitution for Jamaicans, by Jamaicans for future Jamaicans.

Jamaica Debates Commission Should Revise Criteria for Debate Participation

Mario Boothe

Youth & Governance Advocate

JDC Logo

Allowing for differing views and opinion on policy to contend is a critical tenant of democracy, yet the Jamaica Debates Commission (JDC) current setup seems to be ignoring the opinion of our newest political parties and those that identify with their ideology.

In May 2017, the Jamaican parliament in its wisdom approved the “Political Parties Registration Regulations”, this move was to provide for greater transparency and accountability. This also solidified these organizations as part of the democratic and electoral processes in a way they never did before. This registration includes providing organizational structures, gaining signatures and other details.

Only four (4) political parties have so far registered, the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) and People’s National Party (PNP) along with 2 newer parties including the United Independents’ Congress (UIC) and the Jamaica Progressive Party (JPP).

On November 4^th, 2021, the JDC conducted a signing of a MOU that saw the PNP and JLP commit to being a part of the organized debates ahead of the Local Government elections. The exclusion of the JPP and UIC, that are considered “third parties” on the surface may not seem like much, but this should call into question the legitimacy of the election debates.

These third parties are representing concerns not expressed by the establishment options. This was clearly displayed by the UIC’s attempted march on Gordon House this summer.

The JDC’s “Debate Manual” that outlines requirements for political party participation in debates says it cannot be the role of the JDC to provide a platform for political parties to attract national attention, in same breath outlining the hurdles that would limit third party chances in elections. The manual also outlines having public support and ability to form government (fielding candidates and providing policy) as criterion.

With General Election turnout dipping below fifty percent of recent, and Local Government elections trending even lower, it is almost certain to say that no political party has gained the confidence of majority of eligible voters.

It must be suggested that the current JDC manual and format is outdated given the legislative updates and the electoral/political realities.

The commission as a national effort by the media and private sector is excellent, but it should revaluate the necessity to rigorously gatekeep participation, when the limited opinions of the 2-party system has clearly not worked well for the people of Jamaica.

We should be concerned about the quality of our Politics.

Beyond the possible impending effect on our democracy that the destruction
of the current opposition, the People’s National Party would have, we have another disaster in the form of chronically low quality in our political representation and governance both nationally and locally.

At our local level, the Municipal Corporation representation is seen as a glorified divisional organizer appointed by political parties to keep their election machinery active. These local rep functions continue to be overshadowed by central government via Members of Parliament to curry favor with constituents. The local reps are usually less educated but deeply passionate about their communities, often lacking any substantial knowledge about government and governance.

We should be additionally concerned that our local reps with years of representational experience are continuously overlooked by the political parties for promotion to the House of Representatives.

The Upper House (Senate) is a prime example of decline, with the establishment political parties continuing to thwart the initial concept by their perplexing political appointments of defeated politicians, party activist and future candidates. The debates and exchanges on legislative matters seem almost pedestrian. The upper chamber was meant to be a legislative buffer of independent professionals or civic minded folks not a compost heap.  

Lastly, the Lower House having the better crop of representation with older professional, and tertiary educated folks seemingly lacks boldness to go against the party line and fails to truly mirror changing sentiments of their younger and more modern constituents. There is an unwillingness to be creative with policy as many laws get dragged from colonial times to be applied now and reforms being done piecemeal.

There is no need for us to implement any stringent requirements for entry into political representation, as any Jamaican citizen must have a right to run for public office and offer themselves for service. However, we must demand political parties to emphasize the need for candidates to be sufficiently groomed and empowered with the knowledge about our government systems and governance is general.

As a developing state, we must support engagement at an early age with Civics and Government in schools plus continued wholesome youth participation from the community to the national levels. As we better the stock quality in the citizenry, surely, we will see mark improvement overtime as the selected few offers themselves to represent the masses.

Mario Boothe

Youth & Governance Advocate

Fix Vision 2030 accountability mechanism

The Vision 2030 National Development Plan was created in 2008, with the adaptation of the United Nation's Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015, but there have not been any deliberative discussions or reviews by the central or local government until now.

The scope of the auditor general's report titled Jamaica's Preparedness for Implementation of Sustainable Development Goal's, published in September, included:

• an institutional framework for the implementation of the SDGs;

• resource allocation and capacity-building mechanisms; and

• strategies for raising awareness, monitoring and reporting on the progress of preparedness for SDG implementation.

The report points out several significant lapses in accountability that need to be with urgency by our nation's leaders, one of which is the need for a strengthening of the institutional framework that governs the Vision 2030/SDGs implementation.

According to the report, Planning Institute of Jamaica “assumed the lead role”; however, there was no documented evidence to confirm this role as the lead agency. Further, the auditor general found that the lines of accountability were unclear in the National SDG Core Group.

While we seek long-term funding for the full implementation of the SDGs, there must be a strong institutional framework that ensures our monitoring and accountability is well organised and transparent, or we will suffer mismanagement of resources.

 To this end, the report highlighted that the Ministry of Finance and Public Service has no representation on the national core group oversight committee, even though it has responsibility for collection and allocation of public revenue to allow for socio-economic development.

The report recommends that Cabinet considers “delegating overarching responsibility for coordinating the implementation”. This will “identify clear lines of accountability”. It also recommends “the formation of an internal mechanism to apprise parliamentarians of their role and the approach to be taken with respect to matters relating to SDGs”.

Although this audit did not examine SDG preparedness at the sub-national level, I wish to implore every municipal corporation to adopt this audit because SDG implementation at the local level translates to national sustainable development.

The whole of Government, including the Office of the Cabinet, must take serious responsibility for fixing these mechanisms that will serve us well long after 2030, as they seek to strengthen our long-term planning, monitoring and evaluation capabilities.

The Real Gangs of Jamaica

Since 9/11, the world became more aware of terrorism and as such an unmeasurable amount of resources have gone into the elimination terrorists and their organizations around the globe. In Jamaica, we call such organizations, gangs.

Two of the oldest gangs have become institutionalized and, as such, may not appear to be what they really are - terrorist-like organizations.

A careful review of our history should make it clear to you that these two groups have been terrorizing Jamaicans for years, plunging the nation into civil war at a point. In fact, many Jamaicans have been killed, victimized and exiled by these two gangs of the past 74 years. They have fancy and patriotic sounding names ending with "party," but they have committed more crimes than any criminal gang in the land. In fact, they should be given the titles of “Mother and Father of all Jamaican Gangs”. Through their quest for power, these entities created garrisons across the island controlled by “area leaders” and “dons” who have since mostly broken away from the control of their political masters and have done immense damage to life and property in Jamaica.

What bothers me most, however, is that they have been able to disguise themselves that few see these two terrorist organizations for what they are. And many have deep loyalty and respect for their leaders, candidates and officers. Anyone who chooses to join such a party or gang has, by that one act, disqualifies themselves as a true representative of the People. By joining one of these gangs, it shows their lack of knowledge, judgement or moral compass.

The young gang members are no different from the old guards who are training and mentor them to terrorize us in new and more modern ways. Don't be fooled by their sweet mouths or actions; birds of a feather flock together. And, as the Good Book asks, "can two walks together unless they agree?"

Could any truly informed principled person ever join or stay in a group that is a known terrorist organization?

Jamaica is ready to trash these old tethered books who still cling to their less than immaculate past and who refuse to govern to with transparency and accountability.

Voters must decide if they want to settle with continuing to give their pearls to the swine.

It's time to be free!

No Real Political Ownership of Vision 2030

“A Whole of Society Approach” in my opinion was at the centre of Jamaica’s participation in the High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF 2018), more so than the emphasis on our upgraded upper middle income and our lack of resilience. The Forum that took place at the United Nations Headquarters in New York under the theme “Transformation towards sustainable and resilient societies”.

Vision 2030

I followed with interest the presentations, and found that every Jamaican was given full ownership of the Vision 2030 National Development Plan, from conception, implementation, monitoring and evaluation, yet, there is actually very little evidence that Jamaicans are actively involved in the attainment of the national outcomes that align to the Global Sustainable Development Goals.

The Cabinet has taken ownership of Vision 2030, but should a plan of such national importance be only left to the executive to manage or should every elected representative be able to contribute fully to the monitoring of the implementation, has this National Development Plan been debated or mentioned for debate in Gordon House since its original tabling?

Minister Pearnel Charles Jnr

In his presentation at a side event organized by UNDP and the Permanent Mission of Jamaica to the UN, haply titled “2030 Agenda: a whole of society approach” Minister of State Pearnel Charles Jr outlined how critical for his government that the implementation had “citizen participation and a people-centered approach by building awareness” that “full consideration of youth and gender is imperative to policy design.

 (Previous Article:http://jamaica-gleaner.com/article/letters/20170309/parliament-tracking-vision-2030-progress )

Global Goals

How then can a government say there is “people-centred approach” without the peoples elected representatives tasked with forwarding their views and concerns after discourse with constituents to parliament and municipal councils, refusing to bring Vision 2030 to their constituency, to their divisions? As a matter of accountability, this boils down to political expediency for whoever is at the political helm at the time.

Politicians and their parties haven’t been able to successfully engage our citizens in these complex discussions due to the regressive thinking and victuals they have fed the citizens for decades - A MP or Councillor doesn’t see votes in explaining What is Vision 2030? and How we will attain the SDGs?

So.. the question is who are the political owners of Vision 2030? 💭

#JaNoVote2016: Misleading "Pro-Voting" Preaching

 "A vote is like a rifle; its usefulness depends upon the character of the user" - Theodore Roosevelt

During the election season "pro-voting" media content and conversations become almost unbearable trying to save "nonvoters" and "undecided" from everlasting torture in pit of Hell-ocracy, with everyone reading from the same bible. 

Vote evangelists wants you to put a X beside something, thinks that everybody has to identify with a political party, and they keep skipping the first commandment of a democracy; participation. I was compelled - possibly touched - to write this with hope of relieving many "non voters" and "undecided" of their 
"sins."


I will declare that I have not voted and will not vote until I have seen a candidate or a political party or a candidate that best represents and voices the issues that concerns me the most; which includes making comprehensive constitutional and governance reform a top level priority, environmental protection, equality and closing the income gap, until that appointed time I will withhold exercising this sacred right. 


Many would immediately choose to castigate my choice, by automatically replying "If you don't use your right, you will lose it;" indeed this message intended to support citizen empowerment and participation cannot be used to justify irresponsible use or abuse of a your own rights. As I was I understand it, being a citizen in a democratic society, one has individual rights with mutually linked responsibilities. These rights ensure equality and justice for all regardless of what 'divides' us and the responsibilities are there to prevent us from infringing upon others and own rights.

Right to Vote & Its Responsibilities

If you do decide to cast your ballot then you've decided to engage in a single part of "the 
process" that is linked to generations of hardships, fights, bloodshed, activism and political 

willingness across the world. The right to have a say in who is allowed to govern locally or nationally is an awesome task and is constraint by 2 main responsibilities: become informed 
and vote according to ones certain belief.


Therefore a vote should be respected as it symbolises a conscious decision in which the chosen person or party is indeed the best representation of one's belief at that moment with all issues factored in. Hence, to defy ones conscience and express his beliefs wrongly on a ballot is to behave as a irresponsible citizen and soil the sacredness of the vote. It is then safe deduce that one should not be chastised for being an informed "non-voter" or an "undecided" who has weighed all options and come to a conclusion, those who are to be shamed are the irresponsible voters who are the legions of "die-hearts" and "party loyalist" who are uninformed and their only certain belief is that "mi is born PNP or JLP." 

A Dangerous Farce

Any political messaging that seeks to segregate or render a group of people as second class citizen must not be entertained and rebuked as dangerous to the social fabric of our nation. 

Many declared "nonvoters" and "undecided" receive flack; before, during and after election season because the prevailing belief is that "you have no say" and should not say anything because you don't vote. It is encouraged by our political leaders especially those who could benefit from higher turnouts, when they take to political platforms "looking votes" as disguised advocates of citizen involvement. The undue burden of being told how horrible not voting is, and how your allowing bad people to win.


It is a selfish practise to satisfy a politicians own shortcomings in their own inabilities to inspire 
or motivate. Which is often discussed as an aside to blaming "nonvoters" and "undecideds" for the state of nations governance and democracy. 

"The Process" and Participation

I, like so many other young, politically untethered Jamaicans are aware of the encryption and political warping since independence of what a democratic society truly represents in the 21st Century, then we can easily resist and counter the calls for "undecideds" and "non-voters" to "come off the fence" or "come into the yard," respectively. 

We know that voting is not "the process" but apart of the process that includes: 

• dialogue between state and civil society, 
• advocacy, activism, 
• volunteering, 
• affecting/writing policy, 
• old media/social media interactions, 
• civil action/protest, 
• by keeping yourself informed and the list continues. 

Discussions must begin to focus on how we get people involved not just to lead towards a ballot box but create long-lasting positive changes in their society by speaking up and speaking out against bad governance.


Only voting every 5 years cannot and shouldn't be seen as participation. One doesn't affect govt policy or hold government accountable when its convenient for the government, you have to disrupt and intervene whenever there is need to tell the government: We want Fixed Election Dates! Leave the Goat Islands! or #FireFenton!


I don't vote and I don't feel any pressure to vote, because I know I've a well informed and certain decision to withdraw from voting, nothing separates me from someone voting PNP or JLP. I subscribe to my responsibility as a citizen of democratic state to participate otherwise until I decided or find necessary to vote.