Making The SOE Work

While the Chamber is prepared to give the Government and law enforcement agencies the benefit of the doubt, so to speak, and continue to support the extended State of Emergency (SOE) and curfew, this support must be interpreted in the context of the emergency as a means to an end, one of the tools to be used by law enforcement agencies to firmly address the stated threat to public safety.  The SOE should therefore not endure for one minute longer than necessary, otherwise the trust that not only the Chamber, but the public at large, has placed in Government and its agencies will be breached, and the credibility of the Prime Minister and her Cabinet will be at risk.

We agree with Law Association of Trinidad and Tobago insofar as it has stated that the Emergency must not be misused or abused for the purpose of facilitating routine day-to-day policing. Certainly, the information received and arrests made during the SOE should represent a gain to law enforcement which will give a fillip and further impetus to these agencies in the post-Emergency period, but should not be the raison d’etre of the Emergency. As many have stated, albeit in varied language, a step as drastic as the proclamation of the SOE must only be relative to a strict and limited duration, with the expectation that the Police Service and other law enforcement agencies are readying themselves to resume their normal functions which they are mandated to discharge at high levels of effectiveness, when the State of Emergency is lifted.

The Chamber expects that these are some of the criteria to be applied by the National Security Council in its continuing review of the SOE and the curfew. We also expect that some firm benchmarks will be identified and set out to law enforcement agencies for achievement of further gains, and that these will be continually measured and the set criteria enforced.

With specific reference to the curfew, in the Chamber’s opinion, review of its continuance has to be against the background that the measure deprives everyone of the full conduct of lawful business and enjoyment of both life and liberty, as well as the gains by law enforcement agencies which could not be achieved by standard modes of conduct and sustained policing.

The Prime Minister has stated that the 15 murders which occurred during the first month of the curfew, though regrettable, represented a 70% drop over the previous average of 45 murders a month.  If it is that the period of Emergency and/or curfew are really directly responsible for this reduction, the question which naturally arises is whether, in order to maintain this decline, both the Emergency and the curfew must continue indefinitely.

The national rate of detection, arrest and conviction has been appalling, to say the least, and so has law enforcement in general. These cannot be turned around by a State of Emergency or curfew. They can only be addressed by strong leadership, adequate and appropriate resources, along with proper management and robust use of these resources.

With regard to the Prime Minister’s reference to the 3,932 persons held over the period since the start of the State of Emergency to the first week of October, it is well known that some of these detainees have had to be released.  It can also be expected that many more will be released by the Courts when their cases are eventually tried, given the general sorry history of successful prosecution, as well as the experience of incorrect usage of the Anti-Gang legislation. Additionally, it has not been made clear how many of those 3,932 persons held were detained under the Emergency Powers Regulations, which would speak to the effectiveness of the SOE.

Most certainly one effect has been a loss of business and general inconvenience as a result of the curfew. As the Christmas season comes around, vendors, such as wholesalers and retailers in the markets, are being deprived of time to get their goods to consumers, thus affecting their income.

However, we are well advanced on the course, and discussion of whether it is necessary to continue the State of Emergency is moot at this point, although calls from some quarters for the discontinuation of the curfew must, we believe, be given serious consideration by those who are privy to full information on the gains therefrom.  But most significantly, as the end of the period of emergency draws closer, the relevant authorities must begin to make preparations to face public scrutiny:  Will the gains of the Emergency be sustainable? Will policing become more effective as a result? Will the confidence of citizens be restored? Will people be able to return to a freedom from fear which the surging crime instilled?

We hope that among all the measures outlined by the Prime Minister and other Ministers of Government to address crime, a specific anti-crime initiative with stated targets is included.  The measure of its success will be voiced by Trinidad and Tobago when crime has decreased to manageable proportions.