Mark Wignall | Are you quite sure about this, DPP?

I tend to fall on the side of Jamaicans who believe that maximum penalties ought to be imposed on convicted baby killers, rapists of all types, rampaging shottas, and those in an irreversible embrace of the gun.

Like some of you reading this, I do not support ‘community justice’ because wrong labelling by residents can end up with an innocent man hacked to death by community zealots. I have seen it before.

Almost a week ago, the director of public prosecutions (DPP) admitted to recently charging a Mr Dennis Mundell with illegal possession of a gun under the wrong section of the law, and not the new law, which resulted in a relatively light sentence for the offender.

On reading the matter about Mr Mundell, the first bias that showed up was this. I don’t think I would be comfortable sharing a bottle of wine with Mr Mundell, but I hauled it back after that. Through no fault of his own, he is to be placed in a position where a sort of double jeopardy has zoomed in on him.

The DPP stated that she would appeal the sentence. My lawyer friend said: “I think the DPP is capable, competent, and hard working, but her decision to appeal the sentence has me baffled. Her office charged the offender under a certain section of the law (albeit the wrong section). Then the judge sentenced the offender in accordance with the section of the law charged. The judge did nothing wrong.

“It is not the judge’s role to inquire if the DPP is sure that they wish to proceed under a particular section of the law. Judges are required to be fair and impartial, but a judge pointing out possible mistakes to the DPP is not being fair and impartial.”

MADE A MISTAKE

He furrowed his veteran brows and said: “Here is the real meat of it, Mark. The DPP’s office made a mistake. But trying to appeal is wrong. Due process requires a criminal defendant be put on notice as to what he is being charged with. The defendant in this case was indeed put on notice of the charge. The case was resolved with the defendant and his counsel reasonably relying on the charges and reasonably relying on those charges to decide how to defend the case. It would destroy notions of due process and justice to now want to appeal on the grounds of mistake by the DPP/State. If such an appeal would be successful, it would create such uncertainty in the justice system that the system would become a sham!”

I wanted to know at what point in the trial the DPP could intervene. “So what could she have done?”

“If the DPP had detected the mistake before the sentence was pronounced, the DPP could have motioned the court/judge to dismiss the charges and brought new superseding charges or issued a brand-new charging instrument. But now that the defendant has been sentenced and knows his plight, the DPP cannot appeal, in my view. I suppose the DPP’s argument is her office made a genuine mistake.”

Our people may not care too much about the details re the DPP and Mr Mundell, but I believe that it may suit the very capable Ms Llewellyn to ditch that part of her ego urging her to push forward.

“It’s too late,”’ said my friend. “Due process, justice, and fair play would be destroyed if this DPP’s appeal is successful. The DPP should reconsider, accept a mistake was made, and endeavour to not make the same mistake again.”

The late l of the Opposition and PM in the 1980s was a believer in the role of social infrastructural development as a precursor to the bigger development of self. I don’t think it was ever on his agenda to make us want to clear away garbage after exciting events at public events. But he famously said, “It takes cash to care.”

We need to develop a philosophy that recognises a need to fight ignorance. This must be finely interwoven in our children at the very least at primary education age. But of course, force-feeding will not work, will never work.

Our people need to be shown that after the house is built, the ‘his and hers’ towels and cars are secured, the iPhone is coveted, and the children are being educated, that is the perfect time to seek out development of self. At the same time, the political directorate knows that some people prefer to remain in the paddock of small and overworn ideas and approaches.

And we do not ever wish to mimic the American model, where an excess of creature comforts is seen as a precursor to our people wallowing in a virus of anti-intellectualism.

The Scandinavian countries did it. Singapore did it. Japan, after its destructive military past, did it. What do we see that we can cherry-pick and fuse with our unique cultural flavour to bring us to a better place that can span generations and not burn out like a Ponzi operation?

It takes cash to care, but we also know that it takes corruption to make the pot burn up and all good efforts come to naught.

WHEN ECONOMY HUMS POLITICS WANES

Of all the things being discussed at street level, party politics is the least of them. It could be that the ruling Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) is listening more to the voices of the people than the elections statutes or the voices of the Private Sector Organisation of Jamaica (PSOJ).

The local government elections is a great yawning story, and it could be that many people are juggling a job here today, another one tomorrow, and seeing better prospects even as they move the politicians out of the way as stumbling blocks that they have learned to live with.

The people are not demanding any elections. The JLP is cool with that for now. The People’s National Party needs a significant storm in a teacup before it blows itself out. Situation normal, all fouled up. Live on.

- Mark Wignall is a political and public affairs analyst. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and mawigsr@gmail.com.