The Editor, Sir:
Jamaica has long been plagued by a disregard for the rule of law. There is a strong 'ends justifies the means' mentality that has pervaded our society for years. It is true that this may have been entrenched during our anti-slavery and later anti-colonial rebellions, where there was an acceptance that the breaking of the rules was necessary for the greater good of preserving the fundamental rights and freedoms of the African-descended majority.
It is, therefore, not surprising that so many would see the clear attempt of subverting the the laws of the land by allegedly taking Christopher Coke directly to the US embassy as heroic. It is the same reasoning that lead some to embrace sometimes brutal police tactics and vigilante justice as being equally heroic.
The reasons for this are clear. Where people feel that there is no access to justice they are likely to readily embrace that which they see as approximating the result they desire. But as we seek to build a modern democratic society that is anchored in the rule of law, we have to start rejecting vigilantism in favour of the rule of law.
Understandable Safety Concern
In the case of Mr Coke, the fear that his safety would be more assured in the hands of the US authorities vis-à-vis the Jamaican authorities (given the situation surrounding his late father's demise) is entirely understandable.
However, the integrity of our system of laws requires that at some point we will have to trust the system, if it is ever to function fairly and in the interest of us all.
The goodly Reverend Al Miller is a minister of religion, a position accorded high esteem in Jamaican society. If he is allowed to subvert the system without any consequences, then what hope do we have that the average citizen will ever turn to our local system of laws as the true authority in the land? Jamaica is not a US protectorate or appendage. Mr Coke was wanted by the US authorities, but he could have only been extradited through the operation of Jamaican laws. If what Miller is accused of doing is true, he would have deliberately breached Jamaican law in favour of an American request that has no force without the operation of Jamaican law. That should never be condoned, despite well-meaning intentions.
I am, etc.,
RICARDO SMALLING