Editorial | Surprise of JamaicaEye

While The Gleaner sympathises with Horace Chang over his reported difficulty in finding technicians to maintain the JamaicaEye network, we look forward to better particulars from the national security minister, including answers to the questions we posed nearly a month ago.

Indeed, given Dr Chang’s insinuation that the system is merely hobbling along, it would be timely if he urgently issued an exhaustive report/analysis of JamaicaEye, which should also be formally tabled in Parliament at its first sitting after the Christmas break. For without more, we find it hard to understand the specific problems faced by JamaicaEye, given the advance of digital technology on the island, and more importantly, why the authorities seem not to have anticipated the shifts and made robust efforts to get ahead of them.

In any event, The Gleaner supports the effort now being made to employ a maintenance contractor for the system, and hopes that the procurement process can be accelerated without breaking the rules or sacrificing transparency.

JamaicaEye is a network, formally launched in 2018, of government CCTV cameras and private-owned, outward-facing ones. The images were supposed to be centrally monitored to detect and prevent crime, or to gather evidence for their solution.

According to Minister Chang, there are about 1,000 cameras on the network, which, whatever the constraints, this newspaper finds surprisingly, and distressingly, low.

For, within a framework of laws/regulations to prevent the abuse of citizens’ privacy, we support the use of closed-circuit television in public spaces to assist in crime-fighting – and more so in Jamaica, given the country’s serious problem of criminality, particularly its stratospheric homicide rate.

VALUE

Indeed, the use of CCTV systems has long proven their value in the deterrence and the solving of crime, often helping law enforcement officials to quickly identify criminal suspects.

For instance, in Britain, a country with an estimated 5.3 million surveillance cameras, or one for every 13 citizens, its College of Policing earlier this year published the summary of a meta-analysis of 76 studies from several countries that showed a general 13 per cent decrease in crime in places where CCTV was deployed, compared to places where there was none. Thirty of the surveys, 45 per cent, of the underlying studies were done in the UK, and 24, 32 per cent, in the United States.

In places with surveillance cameras, drug-related crimes were lower by 20 per cent and property crime by 14 per cent.

Said the report: “The largest and most consistent effects of CCTV were observed in car parks and, to a lesser extent, residential areas.

“In car parks, crime decreased by 37 per cent overall in treatment areas, compared to control areas…”

No similar analysis is available for Jamaica, but there is strong anecdotal evidence of the value of CCTV, such as the suggestion that the arrest of three police officers in November for an alleged extrajudicial killing was helped by evidence captured on surveillance cameras. And the matter of Romeo Fullerton, 21, who is serving a life sentence for murder, as well as time for possessing an illegal firearm.

His case was a slam dunk. He was caught on a security camera in February committing the act.

Which is why we have been surprised that the Government was not more aggressive in the buildout of JamaicaEye, and by Dr Chang’s disclosure that so few cameras were on the network.

LACK OF MAINTENANCE

In a speech last week, the security minister said a large number of those cameras were not working, largely for lack of maintenance.

“Since we have gone digital with the telecommunications system, nobody in the country has an effective islandwide technology maintenance system,” he said. “... There is no national body with a full maintenance programme … there are a significant number of cameras that are down…”

There was a shortage of digital technicians in the island, he said.

These issues require fuller explanations. By the time JamaicaEye was formalised and embraced the owners of private cameras six years ago, the island’s telecoms were well down the road with digital systems, and the administration was already scoping for the delivery of broadband to every region.

Nonetheless, the companies still have wired networks, which, like much of their external service delivery, are maintained by private contractors – including the one with which Dr Chang says he is seeking to develop a maintenance agreement for JamaicaEye.

There may well be additional facts to which we are not privy, but with the seriousness the administration gives to national security, and the potential value of JamaicaEye in addressing a sore problem, we are surprised that advances in digital technology, and the system’s maintenance, appear not to have commanded more attention and resources.

Dr Chang should explain.