Can Bruce survive KD?

Ian Boyne, Gleaner Writer

It's the scene in the high-tension drama we have all been waiting for: The main actor will meet his expected nemesis and we will all be on the edge of our seats to see how the encounter unfolds. The next-best plot in the drama series - the Knight-Light eclipse - proved to be a grand anticlimax last week, crushed under the weight of the ponderousness of an attorney in need of a listener-friendly voice.

The episode this week will be titled No Time to Lose. The Small one has a big role to play in this episode, guiding us through the long dark Knight of the nation's soul, ensuring that his Driva does not crash. For the main actor in the series, the problem will be, ironically, that he will be seen by many as just that - an actor. If he 'performs' well, the audience will say that's characteristic of his acting career, and if he doesn't, they will conclude he has become a spent force and should pack it in.

Facing Jury Jamaica

When the prime minister faces Jury Jamaica this week, everything will be stacked against him. Talk about a prejudiced, biased, mind-made-up jury, this jury is the classic one. Who in Jury Jamaica is prepared to believe that the real reason Bruce Golding and his justice minister took nine whole months to have Christopher 'Dudus' Coke extradited was because they were sincerely convinced that to do so would be to violate a Jamaican's constitutional rights, which they are sworn to protect?

Who believes that the prime minister's high-sounding defence of human rights, constitutionalism and national sovereignty was not a cynical mask for his wretched desire to keep his useful don in place for the next election? Who believes that his identification of a supposed breach in our extradition treaty with the United States (US) was not a ruse to keep Dudus in his alleged place as head of the murderous Shower Posse?

And that engagement of Manatt, Phelps & Phillips just days after the extradition request; was that not a naked and vulgar attempt to prevent the extradition, rather than to open diplomatic doors as it has been sold; a scheme to frustrate justice and keep an alleged drug- and gunrunner safely ensconced in that mother of all garrisons, Tivoli Gardens?

After it was announced in August 2009 that an extradition request had come for Dudus, it was popular on the streets that "Dudus nah go no weh". People expected Bruce Golding to fight like hell to keep Dudus here. They were, by no means, surprised that he took nine months and had to be forced, at political gunpoint, as it were, to hand him over.

What is interesting to note is that this cynicism about the Golding-Dudus saga is not something confined to the People's National Party (PNP). Jamaica Labour Party supporters themselves believe that their leader had to tell the public something, knowing how valuable this don of dons is to the party and to West Kingston. Labourites console themselves that at least their leader tried his best to stall until he could not fight anymore.

You see what I mean about the classic case of a jury that has already made up its mind. So when Golding swears on the Bible this week at the Jamaica Conference Centre, Jury Jamaica would agree with the adage 'tradition courts dishonesty'. It will be just a meaningless cultural ritual, many will believe.

Logic and rational argumentation are poor substitutes for the overweening, overwhelming power of emotions and groupthink. What if Golding is not lying? How would we know? What would serve as convincing evidence out of this commission of enquiry that Golding did not conspire to keep a criminal in Jamaica just to protect his political interests? How could Golding prove that his reasons for the delay in the extradition were really as follows: To be true to his human rights ideology that the rights of every Jamaican, even the accused, should be protected; that the extradition at that time could have provoked widespread unrest and mayhem, which would have jeopardised the impending International Monetary Fund agreement; that as a nationalist, he had to stand up to the big, bad US? Think about it. How could you falsify Golding's claims? The fact that he engaged Manatt so quickly could have been in furtherance of his sincere belief that the Dudus extradition at that time could cause intolerable mayhem and he had to open diplomatic doors quickly to resolve this impasse. How can you disprove that?

It might have been bad judgement on his part, some might say, but bad judgement and wanting to protect an alleged criminal and don in his constituency is not the same thing. How would you really know if your suspicions about Golding's "true motives" are true? The fact is, you must be honest and admit you can't prove your suspicions. The most you can say is that they are plausible and circumstantial. But you can't be dogmatic, and must be open to evidence.

The other major thing working against Golding is that this country is absolutely, totally and irrevocably repulsed by the politics-criminality link. Apart from those elements which benefit directly, the rest of the society has no stomach for the criminalisation of our politics, for garrisonisation and donmanship. To put it bluntly, none of us in civil society cares one damn about Christopher Coke's constitutional rights. We don't care one damn whether the US has technically breached any treaty; we just wanted to see Dudus' back and felt betrayed that our Government seemed to be dilly-dallying for nine months.

PM On his own

People who normally speak loudest about human and constitutional rights have been silent about even the slightest possibility of any breach of Dudus' rights. Golding might have thought he would have at least attracted their interest. Naïve of him. He was on his own when he was lecturing boldly about rights not starting and stopping at Liguanea. No Jamaicans For Justice, Families Against State Terrorism and the Independent Jamaica Council for Human Rights support there. No one believed him.

The mood of the country, the high levels of crime, the stink of garrison politics, the verandah, street-corner talk about how dons are protected, ensured that there would be absolutely no sympathy for Dudus and his supposed constitutional rights. In our heart of hearts, even if we knew Dudus was illegally, unconstitutionally extradited, we would not give one hoot. That's why Golding faces such a hard time this week.

That Golding did not give up Dudus as quickly as the US barked is the unpardonable sin - even for progressives and anti-American leftists. It's a long time we have wanted to catch and lynch one of these politicians whom we believe have been cavorting with alleged gunmen and murderers and, in our view, Golding must pay for the sins of every politician who has ever backed a don.

The deck is stacked against him. Yet for us in media, we must resist mob justice and do the thankless, daunting task of raising unpopular issues.

Media fall short

By demonstrating that the Phillips Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) did not 'sell out' Jamaicans' constitutional rights, the PNP attorneys have unwittingly justified the Golding government's claim that their use by the US was illegitimate and unjustifiable in grounding the Coke extradition request. Also, what empirical evidence has been offered for the oft-expressed view that it is improper, and even illegal, for a political party to lobby on behalf of its Government? Where is that proven? We in media have not done our job.

And, following the strict laws of evidence, rather than surmising, how does one prove that the engagement of Manatt was to prevent the extradition - as plausible as that is - rather than simply to open diplo-matic doors for dialogue, as the prime minister has been asserting? We need to admit our biases and give Bruce Golding a chance to defend his case. Too many of us have come to a conclusion without rationally weighing the evidence and honestly admitting our prejudgements. We are reacting to our frustrations (politics-donmanship), cynicism (politicians-garrisons), exasperation (high crime) and antipathy (toward our most notorious don, Dudus). Give Golding a fair hearing, if that is still possible.

Rest assured that he will face the best in K.D. Knight and Patrick Atkinson. If there is anyone to nail Golding, as I have said before, it is Knight, who will be at his brilliant best. He will seek to unnerve and anger Golding and press him to lose his cool. K.D. will use histrionics, play to the gallery and reach for all the sound bites he can get.

Golding's primary task is to keep his cool. He can stand up to K.D. intellectually. K.D. will outmatch him with charisma, charm, wit and theatrics, but not in intellectual combat. Golding will be prepared for him on that count. What he must watch are his emotions. He must not lose his cool like Peter Phillips. People won't forget. K.D. will deliberately try to provoke him and might even be discourteous or impolite to him, or to speak in a tone demeaning of his high office. The chair must offer some protection to the prime minister and K.D. must restrain himself, knowing that he does not need rudeness to battle Golding.

Atkinson, who is normally cantankerous and aggressive in his cross-examination - appropriately so categorised in his case - can be expected to be even more galling in tackling Golding this week.

Golding's anger management must be on full display this week. Take the bruises gracefully, PM. The public will make its own judgement if K.D. goes there. Of course, the PM cannot be seen as a pushover and must apply appropriate assertiveness, even aggressiveness, though it has to be carefully measured and never construed as anger - only as righteous indignation.

But I urge K.D. and Patrick to show respect for the office of prime minister, which is still worthy of respect, whatever one's feelings of the present occupant.

Golding did not have to set up this commission. But he did. He did not have to respond to the pressure to do so. He did. He deserves to be heard dispassionately and fairly - in the interest of truth.

Ian Boyne is a veteran media practitioner. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and ianboyne1@yahoo.com.