‘Dudus’ Grand Jury says officials blocking information
BY INVESTIGATIVE COVERAGE UNIT icu@jamaicaobserver.com
THREE unnamed senior government ministers are now under the microscope of the Grand Jury of the Southern District Court of New York which indicted Christopher 'Dudus' Coke last August on alleged gun and drug trafficking charges.
Well-informed Observer sources said the Americans are contending that the Jamaican Government officials had conspired to prevent information from reaching the Grand Jury in the Coke case — the latest in the fallout from the Manatt Phelps and Phillips law firm controversy.
Investigators probing breaches of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) involving the Government of Jamaica, and the US law firm are piecing together evidence they say will expose the alleged link between the government officials, Manatt Phelps and Phillips, and Coke, the Tivoli Gardens strongman.
The Observer sources said the investigators were focusing on two areas: conspiracy to prevent information reaching the Grand Jury, and conspiracy to violate the Foreign Agents Registration Act.
The investigators believe that the firm's service was retained by officials connected to the Government, to lobby Washington not to pressure Jamaica to extradite Coke. In that regard, several influential Americans connected to the US administration were contacted by the law firm, including the administration's nominee as Ambassador to Niger.
"A file from the probe was sent to the Grand Jury, in which the finger was pointed directly at the law firm and the Jamaican Government and the continued delay in the extradition warrant being discharged," the source said.
Opposition spokesman, Dr Peter Phillips who first raised the Manatt, Phelps and Phillips issue in the Parliament, said Good Friday that the matter was still wide open, as information filed by the company to United States officials up to Holy Thursday and that provided by government officials here was at variance.
"No, it's not over. It can't be over when the disparity between the two positions, that of the Government, and that of the firm, leaves too many unanswered questions..." Phillips told the Observer.
The Government said it had no dealings with Manatt, Phelps and Phillips, while the firm is maintaining that it had represented the Government and was paid US$50,000 on its US$100,000 invoice.
April 05, 2010
jamaicaobserver
An International Caribbean Online Log about the news and opinions in the Americas and World. This Caribbean Blog of global reach and appeal is maintained by Bahamian Blogger - Dennis Dames with all readers and subscribers in mind.
Monday, April 5, 2010
Sunday, April 4, 2010
Dancehall hit! United States visa woes will cost Jamaican entertainers big
Mel Cooke, Gleaner Writer:
Local dancehall stars Beenie Man, Bounty Killer, Mavado and Aidonia, as well as selector Ricky Trooper, are set to lose millions of dollars in earnings based on United States decision to revoke their visas.
Last Wednesday, news came that the US had decided to revoke the visas of the five but, so far, there has been no word from the embassy in St Andrew as to why.
And even as Jamaicans speculate about the reason for the about-turn from the US Embassy, the fact is the decision brings devastating financial consequences for the four deejays and one sound-system operator.
All four deejays were scheduled for this year's staging of Best of the Best at Bicentennial Park, Miami, on May 30, with Beenie Man also slated for last night's Firestone Live in Orlando, Florida.
Mavado was to perform on April 23 at Sneaky Petes in New York and on May 8 at Club Nokia in Los Angeles.
Late January, it was reported that Aidonia's two-week stint in the US was going well, with dates in Bronx and Hartford, while a video recording of Ricky Trooper, made when he was in Atlanta, USA, for his birthday celebrations in January, was posted on YouTube in March.
In the video, Trooper brandishes what he later told The Sunday Gleaner was a lighter shaped like a handgun.
US market crucial
Clyde McKenzie, director of audio-visual content developer Fi Wi Choice, says the US market is "very important".
"All of them are dancehall acts and the biggest market for dancehall music is the US, I would say, when it comes to shows and that sort of thing. The earning potential is severely impaired for these acts."
Another music industry insider who spoke on condition of anonymity agreed.
"I would think that a third to a half of their shows would be in the US market." He also pointed out that there are implications for other markets as well, as not only might the authorities in other countries have a different perception of the entertainers involved, but the US is also a travel hub.
The music insider noted that to perform in many countries in Central America, Western Europe, the United Kingdom, Africa and Japan, the entertainers have to travel through the US.
He said the ban affects Beenie Man (based on the track record of his performances) and Mavado (riding on his current popularity) most, with Bounty Killer a distant third while Aidonia, a "young artiste", is just building his fan base.
There does not seem to be an income stream readily available to replace the US shows, and McKenzie points out that "touring is the biggest income stream in the music business. It has always been for reggae and dancehall".
Getting a fix on concert income for these entertainers is well nigh impossible, as the fees vary widely with the capacity of the venue and the type of performance (time and on tracks or with a band) among the determining factors.
While McKenzie estimates artistes' fees in the "tens of thousands to many multiples of that", the industry insider believes the entertainers collect between US$6,000 and US$15,000 for each show.
"But it can go lower," he cautions. "You can do a show for US$2,500. You pass through."
The slash in income, of course, affects everyone connected with the artiste, from backing band through to manager and booking agent.
As McKenzie puts it, there is a "kick-on" effect along the chain. In addition, if deposits have been collected for upcoming US shows and the artistes now cannot fulfil their contractual obligations, the money paid already should be returned. "Whether it could or would is another matter," McKenzie added.
"It affects their earnings. There is no replacement market. There is no market they are not exploiting," he said.
Whether this now creates an opportunity for other performers is debatable.
McKenzie said: "I suppose one could always look at this as the fall of one man is the rising of another. I don't know. The point is you might have some people who say we can't get Beenie and Bounty, we'll take the second tier. With Beenie, Bounty, Kartel, Buju out, you are running out of options."
However, where the danger lies may be in persons who live outside Jamaica stepping into the void - this in a situation where already foreign reggae acts have a very strong presence - and thus in turn reducing Jamaican artistes' income in the long run.
"In many places, you have reggae being part of their range of expression. That would have to be a consideration, as people from these places start emerging. That is a possibility," McKenzie said.
There is no doubt that the visa revocation comes at an already bad time. McKenzie said, "One of the things I've looked at is the world situation of different territories using different reasons for restricting us from entering them. Europe has concerns about the homophobic stuff, the Caribbean people tend to not talk about homophobia, but violence. The space is being restricted."
And, as the industry insider puts it, "I think this is another strategy to trap Jamaicans in Jamaica and keep them out of other areas. It may be self-inflicted, but the point is they are willing."
April 4, 2010
jamaica-gleaner
Local dancehall stars Beenie Man, Bounty Killer, Mavado and Aidonia, as well as selector Ricky Trooper, are set to lose millions of dollars in earnings based on United States decision to revoke their visas.
Last Wednesday, news came that the US had decided to revoke the visas of the five but, so far, there has been no word from the embassy in St Andrew as to why.
And even as Jamaicans speculate about the reason for the about-turn from the US Embassy, the fact is the decision brings devastating financial consequences for the four deejays and one sound-system operator.
All four deejays were scheduled for this year's staging of Best of the Best at Bicentennial Park, Miami, on May 30, with Beenie Man also slated for last night's Firestone Live in Orlando, Florida.
Mavado was to perform on April 23 at Sneaky Petes in New York and on May 8 at Club Nokia in Los Angeles.
Late January, it was reported that Aidonia's two-week stint in the US was going well, with dates in Bronx and Hartford, while a video recording of Ricky Trooper, made when he was in Atlanta, USA, for his birthday celebrations in January, was posted on YouTube in March.
In the video, Trooper brandishes what he later told The Sunday Gleaner was a lighter shaped like a handgun.
US market crucial
Clyde McKenzie, director of audio-visual content developer Fi Wi Choice, says the US market is "very important".
"All of them are dancehall acts and the biggest market for dancehall music is the US, I would say, when it comes to shows and that sort of thing. The earning potential is severely impaired for these acts."
Another music industry insider who spoke on condition of anonymity agreed.
"I would think that a third to a half of their shows would be in the US market." He also pointed out that there are implications for other markets as well, as not only might the authorities in other countries have a different perception of the entertainers involved, but the US is also a travel hub.
The music insider noted that to perform in many countries in Central America, Western Europe, the United Kingdom, Africa and Japan, the entertainers have to travel through the US.
He said the ban affects Beenie Man (based on the track record of his performances) and Mavado (riding on his current popularity) most, with Bounty Killer a distant third while Aidonia, a "young artiste", is just building his fan base.
There does not seem to be an income stream readily available to replace the US shows, and McKenzie points out that "touring is the biggest income stream in the music business. It has always been for reggae and dancehall".
Getting a fix on concert income for these entertainers is well nigh impossible, as the fees vary widely with the capacity of the venue and the type of performance (time and on tracks or with a band) among the determining factors.
While McKenzie estimates artistes' fees in the "tens of thousands to many multiples of that", the industry insider believes the entertainers collect between US$6,000 and US$15,000 for each show.
"But it can go lower," he cautions. "You can do a show for US$2,500. You pass through."
The slash in income, of course, affects everyone connected with the artiste, from backing band through to manager and booking agent.
As McKenzie puts it, there is a "kick-on" effect along the chain. In addition, if deposits have been collected for upcoming US shows and the artistes now cannot fulfil their contractual obligations, the money paid already should be returned. "Whether it could or would is another matter," McKenzie added.
"It affects their earnings. There is no replacement market. There is no market they are not exploiting," he said.
Whether this now creates an opportunity for other performers is debatable.
McKenzie said: "I suppose one could always look at this as the fall of one man is the rising of another. I don't know. The point is you might have some people who say we can't get Beenie and Bounty, we'll take the second tier. With Beenie, Bounty, Kartel, Buju out, you are running out of options."
However, where the danger lies may be in persons who live outside Jamaica stepping into the void - this in a situation where already foreign reggae acts have a very strong presence - and thus in turn reducing Jamaican artistes' income in the long run.
"In many places, you have reggae being part of their range of expression. That would have to be a consideration, as people from these places start emerging. That is a possibility," McKenzie said.
There is no doubt that the visa revocation comes at an already bad time. McKenzie said, "One of the things I've looked at is the world situation of different territories using different reasons for restricting us from entering them. Europe has concerns about the homophobic stuff, the Caribbean people tend to not talk about homophobia, but violence. The space is being restricted."
And, as the industry insider puts it, "I think this is another strategy to trap Jamaicans in Jamaica and keep them out of other areas. It may be self-inflicted, but the point is they are willing."
April 4, 2010
jamaica-gleaner
Saturday, April 3, 2010
Thank you, the world, on behalf of the people of Haiti!
By Jean H Charles:
An unprecedented event happened on Wednesday at the United Nations in New York. Some one hundred countries sent their Ministers of Foreign Affairs or their Ambassadors to pledge their contributions to the earthquake stricken Haiti.
As in a Baptist church, each nation stepped up to present its envelope to the Speaker on behalf of Haiti. At the end of the day some ten billion dollars was raised for the Haitian people who are still in the mud in the refugee tents of Port au Prince and in the rural hamlets in the mountains of Haiti, deprived of any modern infrastructure.
This unexpected global response on behalf of Haiti moves me personally; the people of Haiti should know the entire world is on their side.
The speeches by the delegates were in unison, praising the resilience and the patience of the Haitian people. They deserve a helping hand.
Will it be trickling down to those in most need? It was the underlying issue expressed by the Chinese representative, who contributed only one million dollars to Haiti. I shared my surprise to the Chinese diplomat sitting near by me in the hall of the United Nations.
He told me China is concerned about management and transparency at all levels: the Haitian government, the United Nations, the Red Cross, etc.
He added we have been able to raise the welfare of some 800 million Chinese to the middle class level in less than a generation (25 years) without asking or borrowing one cent!
He said further, helping the nine million Haitians arrive to an income from $1 to $100 a day is a child’s game if only we have a minimum of diplomatic relationship with Haiti!
The enthusiastic response indicates the nations of the world are ready to offer more than money at the donor’s conference. It is important to encapsulate the energy into resources that can be utilized to bring about growth to Haiti.
The nations of the world are at an impasse; the Haitian government has failed to provide a minimum coordinating unit that would facilitate the delivery of services to the refugees. Yet in deference to the Haitian government, the foreign allies have hesitated to create an effective coordinating unit.
In the end the victims are the Haitian people who are still in the mud in spite of the outpouring of love and support from the whole world.
To solve this issue, I would propose a strategic winnable solution. The country of Haiti a nation of nine million people is divided into ten departments or ten states.
To facilitate the delivery of services in the face of the compounding problems, it would serve the Haitian government and the donating countries to divide Haiti into three clusters of three million people each for the purpose of coordinating the rescue and the resettlement process.
The Northern part of Haiti that include the departments of the North, North East and North West, the Artibonite and the Center, with approximately three million, would be shepherded by Canada, leading the role of a quarterback, with other countries attaching themselves to that main branch.
The second branch of quarterback would be played by the United States helping the western part of the country that includes the capital city, Port au Prince, to move from a desperate situation to some normalcy. The United States would call on other countries to plug themselves into the aid movement.
Last but not least, France would coordinate the southern part of Haiti that includes South-east, Nippes, South and Grand Anse. Akin to the other quarterbacks, France would call on any other nations that want to help in that venture.
Those countries -- Canada, United States and France -- have been chosen because of their affinity with Haiti. They all have a large Haitian Diaspora that can play a crucial role in facilitating the development of the country.
This division of labor would have the convenience of not offending the sovereignty of the Haitian people and the sensitivity of the Haitian government.
It would place some coordinating responsibility into the hands of the quarterback nations, while leaving the moving force to the Haitian government and to the Haitian people.
It would provide immediate relief and start the decentralization process of the Haitian nation. It is a win-win solution that can and should satisfy all parties.
Next September, the United Nations promised to call on the parties again to review the job done; this time instead of announcing, as the United States has done, successive grants totaling 4 billion dollars since 1990 with no visible signs of results, the Haitian government along with the three quarterbacsk will stand up to report on a job well done.
To arrive at that result, a minimum of 3 million dollars should be spent in each one of the 150 small towns along with their rural hamlets. This financial structural engagement has not been done since the nation was born two hundred years ago. It would provide, in addition to the wireless internet -- a pet project of Bill Clinton -- clean water, decent housing, elementary education, clean sewers, and paved streets to a nation thirsty for a modern standard of living.
The earthquake on January 12, 2010 has pulled out from the underground a little dirty secret of the Haitian ethos. A proud daughter of Lady Liberty, Haiti has turned into a de facto apartheid system, where the majority of its citizens live in almost abject poverty similar to their ancestor’s time during the slavery era.
Since it has been discovered, the problem of Haiti is now the world’s problem. The trio of quarterbacks will have to help Haiti with that fault line by facilitating a culture of a shared vision of the future amongst all the citizens.
The Haitian people, so patient and so resilient, would be on their way to having a decent job, a roof that would not fall on their head, potable water to drink, children happy and well fed, who learn in school, young men who give up the gang culture because they are learning a trade. This Haiti is possible if only a minimum of strategic coordination is implemented after this biblical outpouring of love and support.
Note: The map of Haiti with the delimitation of the catchments area of each cluster.
caribbeannetnews
An unprecedented event happened on Wednesday at the United Nations in New York. Some one hundred countries sent their Ministers of Foreign Affairs or their Ambassadors to pledge their contributions to the earthquake stricken Haiti.
As in a Baptist church, each nation stepped up to present its envelope to the Speaker on behalf of Haiti. At the end of the day some ten billion dollars was raised for the Haitian people who are still in the mud in the refugee tents of Port au Prince and in the rural hamlets in the mountains of Haiti, deprived of any modern infrastructure.
This unexpected global response on behalf of Haiti moves me personally; the people of Haiti should know the entire world is on their side. The speeches by the delegates were in unison, praising the resilience and the patience of the Haitian people. They deserve a helping hand.
Will it be trickling down to those in most need? It was the underlying issue expressed by the Chinese representative, who contributed only one million dollars to Haiti. I shared my surprise to the Chinese diplomat sitting near by me in the hall of the United Nations.
He told me China is concerned about management and transparency at all levels: the Haitian government, the United Nations, the Red Cross, etc.
He added we have been able to raise the welfare of some 800 million Chinese to the middle class level in less than a generation (25 years) without asking or borrowing one cent!
He said further, helping the nine million Haitians arrive to an income from $1 to $100 a day is a child’s game if only we have a minimum of diplomatic relationship with Haiti!
The enthusiastic response indicates the nations of the world are ready to offer more than money at the donor’s conference. It is important to encapsulate the energy into resources that can be utilized to bring about growth to Haiti.
The nations of the world are at an impasse; the Haitian government has failed to provide a minimum coordinating unit that would facilitate the delivery of services to the refugees. Yet in deference to the Haitian government, the foreign allies have hesitated to create an effective coordinating unit.
In the end the victims are the Haitian people who are still in the mud in spite of the outpouring of love and support from the whole world.
To solve this issue, I would propose a strategic winnable solution. The country of Haiti a nation of nine million people is divided into ten departments or ten states.
To facilitate the delivery of services in the face of the compounding problems, it would serve the Haitian government and the donating countries to divide Haiti into three clusters of three million people each for the purpose of coordinating the rescue and the resettlement process.
The Northern part of Haiti that include the departments of the North, North East and North West, the Artibonite and the Center, with approximately three million, would be shepherded by Canada, leading the role of a quarterback, with other countries attaching themselves to that main branch.
The second branch of quarterback would be played by the United States helping the western part of the country that includes the capital city, Port au Prince, to move from a desperate situation to some normalcy. The United States would call on other countries to plug themselves into the aid movement.
Last but not least, France would coordinate the southern part of Haiti that includes South-east, Nippes, South and Grand Anse. Akin to the other quarterbacks, France would call on any other nations that want to help in that venture.
Those countries -- Canada, United States and France -- have been chosen because of their affinity with Haiti. They all have a large Haitian Diaspora that can play a crucial role in facilitating the development of the country.
This division of labor would have the convenience of not offending the sovereignty of the Haitian people and the sensitivity of the Haitian government.
It would place some coordinating responsibility into the hands of the quarterback nations, while leaving the moving force to the Haitian government and to the Haitian people.
It would provide immediate relief and start the decentralization process of the Haitian nation. It is a win-win solution that can and should satisfy all parties.
Next September, the United Nations promised to call on the parties again to review the job done; this time instead of announcing, as the United States has done, successive grants totaling 4 billion dollars since 1990 with no visible signs of results, the Haitian government along with the three quarterbacsk will stand up to report on a job well done.
To arrive at that result, a minimum of 3 million dollars should be spent in each one of the 150 small towns along with their rural hamlets. This financial structural engagement has not been done since the nation was born two hundred years ago. It would provide, in addition to the wireless internet -- a pet project of Bill Clinton -- clean water, decent housing, elementary education, clean sewers, and paved streets to a nation thirsty for a modern standard of living.
The earthquake on January 12, 2010 has pulled out from the underground a little dirty secret of the Haitian ethos. A proud daughter of Lady Liberty, Haiti has turned into a de facto apartheid system, where the majority of its citizens live in almost abject poverty similar to their ancestor’s time during the slavery era.
Since it has been discovered, the problem of Haiti is now the world’s problem. The trio of quarterbacks will have to help Haiti with that fault line by facilitating a culture of a shared vision of the future amongst all the citizens.
The Haitian people, so patient and so resilient, would be on their way to having a decent job, a roof that would not fall on their head, potable water to drink, children happy and well fed, who learn in school, young men who give up the gang culture because they are learning a trade. This Haiti is possible if only a minimum of strategic coordination is implemented after this biblical outpouring of love and support.
Note: The map of Haiti with the delimitation of the catchments area of each cluster.
caribbeannetnews
Friday, April 2, 2010
Jamaican court to rule on US extradition request
KINGSTON, Jamaica (Reuters) - Prime Minister Bruce Golding has asked Jamaica's courts to rule on a US request for the extradition of an alleged leader of the Caribbean island's notorious Shower Posse drug gang.
The government is resisting US demands that it hand over Christopher "Dudus" Coke, citing what Golding has described as unauthorized wiretaps and other problems with evidence against him.
The Shower Posse has been blamed for hundreds of killings in the United States, and Coke is wanted on US arms and drug trafficking charges.
The premier told a call-in radio program on Wednesday night that he had asked Justice Minister Dorothy Lightbourne to send the eight-month-old request before a judge for a decision.
"I have instructed the justice minister to make an application to the court to seek a declaration to determine whether or not there was a breach of the law or the (extradition) treaty," Golding said.
Coke is a member of the ruling Jamaica Labour Party and holds considerable sway over Golding's volatile constituency in the inner-city district of West Kingston.
In its annual narcotics control strategy report issued last month, the US State Department criticized Jamaica's handling of the Coke matter and said pervasive public corruption was a major barrier to improving the country's counter-narcotics efforts.
"Jamaica's delay in processing the US extradition request for a major suspected drug and firearms trafficker with reported ties to the ruling party highlights the potential depth of corruption in the government," the report said.
Vivian Blake, founder of the Shower Posse, died of natural causes in a Jamaican hospital last month, about a year after returning from a prison term in the United States.
Coke is believed to be the new head of the gang, named for its alleged practice of cutting down rivals in a hail of gunfire in the cocaine wars of the 1980s.
April 2, 2010
caribbeannetnews
The government is resisting US demands that it hand over Christopher "Dudus" Coke, citing what Golding has described as unauthorized wiretaps and other problems with evidence against him.
The Shower Posse has been blamed for hundreds of killings in the United States, and Coke is wanted on US arms and drug trafficking charges.
The premier told a call-in radio program on Wednesday night that he had asked Justice Minister Dorothy Lightbourne to send the eight-month-old request before a judge for a decision.
"I have instructed the justice minister to make an application to the court to seek a declaration to determine whether or not there was a breach of the law or the (extradition) treaty," Golding said.
Coke is a member of the ruling Jamaica Labour Party and holds considerable sway over Golding's volatile constituency in the inner-city district of West Kingston.
In its annual narcotics control strategy report issued last month, the US State Department criticized Jamaica's handling of the Coke matter and said pervasive public corruption was a major barrier to improving the country's counter-narcotics efforts.
"Jamaica's delay in processing the US extradition request for a major suspected drug and firearms trafficker with reported ties to the ruling party highlights the potential depth of corruption in the government," the report said.
Vivian Blake, founder of the Shower Posse, died of natural causes in a Jamaican hospital last month, about a year after returning from a prison term in the United States.
Coke is believed to be the new head of the gang, named for its alleged practice of cutting down rivals in a hail of gunfire in the cocaine wars of the 1980s.
April 2, 2010
caribbeannetnews
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Bahamas: Child sex abuse cases up 42%
By Keva Lightbourne ~ Guardian Senior Reporter ~ kdl@nasguard.com:
Reported cases of child sexual abuse are up 42 percent over last year, according to Deputy Director of Social Services Carolyn Hepburn.
Hepburn revealed to The Nassau Guardian yesterday that so far for 2010, 118 cases have been reported, up from 83 in the same period last year.
"That is primarily due to the enactment of the Child Protection Act 2007 in October last year. So therefore persons are mandated by law to report abuse and we find that children are stepping forward, relatives and concerned individuals are becoming more vigilant," Hepburn said.
Of the 118 reported child sexual abuse cases, 26 have been recorded in New Providence and 92 in the Family Islands.
Chairman of the National Child Protection Council Pastor Gil Maycock said he believes child sexual abuse is far greater than what is being reported.
"We do have an alarming epidemic in our nation and it drives me crazy," he said. "These numbers seem to be increasing over the last three or four years. They just seem to be going up. We do know in certain pockets in The Bahama Islands we are having serious problems. The Council plans to travel to at least 10 or 11 Family Islands for the remainder of 2010 to get that message out (that children are off limits) and we know it is an uphill battle."
Last year, there were 218 reported cases of child sexual abuse in the country. Of that number, 155 were recorded in New Providence, with the remaining 63 reported in the Family Islands.
"In our efforts throughout this year we are going to continue to make sure that we are addressing it in the schools," Maycock said.
He pointed to the Council's 'Say No Then Go' campaign, which has been launched in primary schools to educate students about the difference between "a good touch and a bad touch."
Maycock reminded that anyone below the age of 16 "is considered to be a child and should not be touched by anyone."
"One of the reasons we feel the increase in reporting of cases [has occurred] is because we have been getting the message out. [With] the Ministry of Labour [and] Social Development', [the] Child Protection Council and other agencies, we have over the last 10 years been really getting the message out and so a lot more children know about what child abuse is; they know who to report it to and that is one of the reasons we believe we are starting to see a greater number of cases being reported to the various agencies. We know the battle is still great," said Maycock.
April 01, 2010
thenassauguardian
Reported cases of child sexual abuse are up 42 percent over last year, according to Deputy Director of Social Services Carolyn Hepburn.
Hepburn revealed to The Nassau Guardian yesterday that so far for 2010, 118 cases have been reported, up from 83 in the same period last year.
"That is primarily due to the enactment of the Child Protection Act 2007 in October last year. So therefore persons are mandated by law to report abuse and we find that children are stepping forward, relatives and concerned individuals are becoming more vigilant," Hepburn said.
Of the 118 reported child sexual abuse cases, 26 have been recorded in New Providence and 92 in the Family Islands.
Chairman of the National Child Protection Council Pastor Gil Maycock said he believes child sexual abuse is far greater than what is being reported.
"We do have an alarming epidemic in our nation and it drives me crazy," he said. "These numbers seem to be increasing over the last three or four years. They just seem to be going up. We do know in certain pockets in The Bahama Islands we are having serious problems. The Council plans to travel to at least 10 or 11 Family Islands for the remainder of 2010 to get that message out (that children are off limits) and we know it is an uphill battle."
Last year, there were 218 reported cases of child sexual abuse in the country. Of that number, 155 were recorded in New Providence, with the remaining 63 reported in the Family Islands.
"In our efforts throughout this year we are going to continue to make sure that we are addressing it in the schools," Maycock said.
He pointed to the Council's 'Say No Then Go' campaign, which has been launched in primary schools to educate students about the difference between "a good touch and a bad touch."
Maycock reminded that anyone below the age of 16 "is considered to be a child and should not be touched by anyone."
"One of the reasons we feel the increase in reporting of cases [has occurred] is because we have been getting the message out. [With] the Ministry of Labour [and] Social Development', [the] Child Protection Council and other agencies, we have over the last 10 years been really getting the message out and so a lot more children know about what child abuse is; they know who to report it to and that is one of the reasons we believe we are starting to see a greater number of cases being reported to the various agencies. We know the battle is still great," said Maycock.
April 01, 2010
thenassauguardian
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Sexual assault in Bahamas 'has reached unacceptable heights'
By ALESHA CADET:
WHILE the number of reported rape cases in the Bahamas is increasing, convictions of sexual offenders are not, according to the Bahamas Crisis Centre.
Dr Sandra Dean Patterson, director of the Centre, told The Tribune that sexual assault in the Bahamas has reached "unacceptable heights."
"Rape has almost become endemic in our society," she said.
Donna Nicolls, a counsellor at the Centre added: "There is certainly an increase in the number reported because of the advocacy and the laws. There are also cases that came to our attention that are not being reported - that goes without saying."
"We see a lot of the results now of the rapes and molestation that have never been documented because of fear.
"What is not happening is convictions. I personally get excited when I see convictions.
"But the women are choosing to not go through the legal process, the process is demeaning," Mrs Nicolls said.
According to Dr Patterson, the system for dealing with sex crimes has to be improved. Victims currently wait up to eight years to get justice, she pointed out.
"We have to do more to address it. It is very important that people be charged."
Head of the Central Detective Unit (CDU) Asst Supt Leon Bethel told The Tribune that sexual offences are difficult to police and investigate.
"As long as the matter comes to us we investigate it and send them to court, (but) is hard to police sexual intercourse, it normally happens behind closed doors," he said. "It is a manifestation to what is going on in the society."
According to Assistant Superintendent Moxey, head of the CDU's Technology Management Section: "The basic approach we have is an educational awareness programme.
"In addition we are trying to put the persons before the court. The penalties are stiff, the laws are adequate," he said.
ASP Moxey told The Tribune one of the biggest areas of concern in recent years has been sex crimes committed by minors, but the police's efforts to speak with and educate students seem to be having a positive impact.
"We cannot eradicate it totally, but we can have the problem reduced to a minimum through educational changes," he said.
March 31, 2010
tribune242
WHILE the number of reported rape cases in the Bahamas is increasing, convictions of sexual offenders are not, according to the Bahamas Crisis Centre.
Dr Sandra Dean Patterson, director of the Centre, told The Tribune that sexual assault in the Bahamas has reached "unacceptable heights."
"Rape has almost become endemic in our society," she said.
Donna Nicolls, a counsellor at the Centre added: "There is certainly an increase in the number reported because of the advocacy and the laws. There are also cases that came to our attention that are not being reported - that goes without saying."
"We see a lot of the results now of the rapes and molestation that have never been documented because of fear.
"What is not happening is convictions. I personally get excited when I see convictions.
"But the women are choosing to not go through the legal process, the process is demeaning," Mrs Nicolls said.
According to Dr Patterson, the system for dealing with sex crimes has to be improved. Victims currently wait up to eight years to get justice, she pointed out.
"We have to do more to address it. It is very important that people be charged."
Head of the Central Detective Unit (CDU) Asst Supt Leon Bethel told The Tribune that sexual offences are difficult to police and investigate.
"As long as the matter comes to us we investigate it and send them to court, (but) is hard to police sexual intercourse, it normally happens behind closed doors," he said. "It is a manifestation to what is going on in the society."
According to Assistant Superintendent Moxey, head of the CDU's Technology Management Section: "The basic approach we have is an educational awareness programme.
"In addition we are trying to put the persons before the court. The penalties are stiff, the laws are adequate," he said.
ASP Moxey told The Tribune one of the biggest areas of concern in recent years has been sex crimes committed by minors, but the police's efforts to speak with and educate students seem to be having a positive impact.
"We cannot eradicate it totally, but we can have the problem reduced to a minimum through educational changes," he said.
March 31, 2010
tribune242
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
The secrecy of the Commonwealth Secretariat: Time for reform
By Andrew Smith, (Intern, Human Rights Advocacy Programme, CHRI):
After more than 60 years in existence, the Commonwealth Secretariat (the Secretariat) continues to operate in an environment of secrecy, largely insulated from public scrutiny and the full involvement of civil society organisations.
Over a decade has passed since the right of access to information was recognised as ‘legal’ and ‘enforceable’ at the 1999 Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM). Its importance has since been reiterated at the 2007 CHOGM and Commonwealth bodies have described it as “fundamental” and “a cornerstone of democracy and good governance.” A model law has also been drafted to assist domestic legislators.
However, the Secretariat’s own information disclosure practices fall far short of international standards. Comparable organisations such as the World Bank, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the European Union and the Council of Europe have all adopted comprehensive access to information policies with many progressive provisions. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is currently reforming its disclosure policy.
The comparison highlights that the Secretariat’s disclosure practices do not adhere to international best practice standards, that they do not adequately serve its goals of democracy, freedom and sustainable development and that the need for reform is urgent.
Most interstate policies adopt strong object clauses, affirming their commitment to access to information as a fundamental human right. Further to this, their common aim is to maximise the ‘effectiveness’, ‘quality’ and ‘legitimacy’ of their organisation’s output through increased transparency, civic engagement and accountability.
The World Bank states that its commitment to openness is “driven by a desire to foster public ownership, partnership, and participation in operations and is central to achieving the Bank’s mission to alleviate poverty and to improve the design and implementation of their projects and policies.”
The European Union reflects this sentiment, emphasising the importance of openness in its democratic system. As publicly funded organisations, they recognise the democratic right of their stakeholders to hold them to account.
The UNDP identifies its stakeholders as the parliaments, tax payers and public of their donor and programme countries.
The World Bank and IMF both report increased demand for accountability following the financial crisis, the former promising to hold itself to the same human rights standards it expects of its member states.
The Secretariat is a publicly funded body mandated to act in the ‘common interest of the people’. As such it must adopt an access to informational policy which facilitates civic engagement and accountability. This will increase the legitimacy of the Secretariat as a democratic organisation and improve the effectiveness of its policy outcomes.
The rhetoric of the object clauses are mostly supported by substantive policy provisions. Whilst not entirely compliant with international standards, they are substantially more progressive than the Secretariat’s practices.
The Secretariat currently operates a ‘positive list’ approach to disclosure, voluntarily publishing a limited range of documents on its website on a routine basis. Documents include ministerial communiqués, commonwealth declarations, newsletters, speeches, statements, reports and strategic documents.
This discretionary ‘positive list’ policy presumes the confidentiality of undisclosed documents without considering the nature of the information’s content or the interests at stake. All of the aforementioned interstate organisations have abandoned ‘positive lists’ in favour of the principle of ‘maximum disclosure’.
The World Bank regards this as the ‘paradigm shift’ in its policy whilst the Council of Europe explains that now “transparency is the rule and confidentiality the exception.”
The principle of maximum disclosure is formulated to maximise the availability of information, guaranteeing access to information as a fundamental human right. The principle has two features.
Firstly it presumes that all information is eligible for disclosure on request, unless specified under the exemption schedules.
Secondly, there must be an obligation to routinely publish a specified list of documents. Applying this obligation to as broad a range of documents as possible at various developmental stages facilitates civil society involvement whilst reducing the costs associated with information requests. All of the aforementioned policies comply with both features of the maximum disclosure principle.
The Secretariat must broaden its practice of routine disclosure, establish it as a duty and reverse the presumption of confidentiality for unpublished documents. This would represent a substantial departure from current practice and a positive step towards compliance with international standards.
The presumption of disclosure is not absolute and is constrained by the principle of limited exemptions. Confidentiality may be upheld in narrowly defined circumstances for the protection of legitimate interests from specified harms. This requires a case by case assessment and does not permit blanket exclusions based on official classifications or document type.
The Council of Europe schedule is weakest, excluding all classified information from disclosure. The World Bank refuses to disclose information falling within its schedule as it “could” cause harm, presuming confidentiality and failing to engage in an individual assessment of relevant interests. Some exemptions are overly broad, including those relating to ‘corporate administrative matters’ and ‘deliberative information’.
Similarly, the UNDP excludes ‘draft documents’ entirely, limiting the scope for civil society engagement.
The European Union has two exemption schedules. The first complies with international standards, citing legitimate interests. It is also the only schedule with a ‘severability clause’, allowing for the partial publication of documents. A second schedule entirely excludes ‘sensitive documents’ from disclosure due to their confidentiality statuses.
It is critical that exemptions are subject to a ‘public interest override’. If the public interest in disclosure is greater than the likely harm, then there must be an obligation to disclose. The UNDP and Council of Europe policies both lack public interest overrides. The World Bank only provides a discretionary override which can also be reversed to withhold information otherwise routinely disclosed.
The European Union only provides a public interest override for two categories of ‘interests’ under its first schedule and none under the second. The Secretariat must note that these policies fail to provide adequate safeguards against the abuse of the limited exemptions principle.
Documents ‘excluded’ from disclosure must only retain their confidentiality for as long as the public interest demands. Retention schedules must also be available to respondents whose applications are refused. Documents that are scheduled for destruction are presumed to be of no use to the originator, and therefore disclosure cannot be deemed harmful to the public interest.
It is the Secretariat’s blanket policy to retain the confidentiality of all undisclosed documents for thirty years. They are then only made publicly available subject to the Secretariat’s discretion and the consent of concerned third parties. None of the interstate organisations analysed have a default thirty year declassification period.
The European Union and the Council of Europe both set thirty years as the maximum period for refusing disclosure. Within this limit, the European Union provides that excepted material may only remain confidential for the period which it remains harmful.
The Council of Europe and World Bank adopt tiers of confidentiality with limitation periods dependant on document type. The former has periods of one, ten and thirty years and the latter has periods of five, ten and twenty years.
The UNDP does not specify its declassification periods. When initiating reforms the Secretariat must strive to disclose confidential information as promptly as the public interest test allows.
International standards require that refusals to disclose documents are accompanied with reasons and the availability of two tiers of appeal. The independence of the second tier must be guaranteed. The Secretariat has no procedure for requesting documents and therefore no appeals mechanism.
The European Union provides the opportunity for a ‘confirmatory request’ to the original decision maker followed by an appeal to an Independent Ombudsman or the Court of First Instance. This does not apply to ‘sensitive documents’.
The World Bank and UNDP provide for a first review by an internal panel and a secondary review by an independent panel. The World Bank only permits appeals where a prima facie case is made of a policy violation or where there is a public interest case to be made for disclosure. Appeals on the latter ground may not be heard by the secondary panel, meaning the public interest is never determined independently.
The Council of Europe does not have an appeals mechanism. The Secretariat must incorporate a two tier appeals mechanism with a guarantee of independence into its information disclosure policy.
Information request procedures must be accessible and user-friendly, communicating decisions or the requested documents promptly and at a reasonable price. The aforementioned policies all adopt provisions to this effect.
The Secretariat only permits access to unpublished public documents by appointment at the library of its London headquarters, refusing to provide copies. This is extremely restrictive for the majority of commonwealth citizens. Increased accessibility must become a reform priority.
The Secretariat has the opportunity to advance to the forefront of international transparency and democratic standards by adopting a progressive access to information policy. It must undertake reforms immediately in the spirit of transparency with the maximum involvement of Commonwealth stakeholders.
This consultation, along with an assessment of existing access to information policies and model laws, will greatly assist the Secretariat in remedying the deficiencies of its current practices and enable the Commonwealth to better pursue its goals of freedom, democracy and sustainable development.
March 30, 2010
caribbeannetnews
After more than 60 years in existence, the Commonwealth Secretariat (the Secretariat) continues to operate in an environment of secrecy, largely insulated from public scrutiny and the full involvement of civil society organisations.
Over a decade has passed since the right of access to information was recognised as ‘legal’ and ‘enforceable’ at the 1999 Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM). Its importance has since been reiterated at the 2007 CHOGM and Commonwealth bodies have described it as “fundamental” and “a cornerstone of democracy and good governance.” A model law has also been drafted to assist domestic legislators.
However, the Secretariat’s own information disclosure practices fall far short of international standards. Comparable organisations such as the World Bank, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the European Union and the Council of Europe have all adopted comprehensive access to information policies with many progressive provisions. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is currently reforming its disclosure policy.
The comparison highlights that the Secretariat’s disclosure practices do not adhere to international best practice standards, that they do not adequately serve its goals of democracy, freedom and sustainable development and that the need for reform is urgent.
Most interstate policies adopt strong object clauses, affirming their commitment to access to information as a fundamental human right. Further to this, their common aim is to maximise the ‘effectiveness’, ‘quality’ and ‘legitimacy’ of their organisation’s output through increased transparency, civic engagement and accountability.
The World Bank states that its commitment to openness is “driven by a desire to foster public ownership, partnership, and participation in operations and is central to achieving the Bank’s mission to alleviate poverty and to improve the design and implementation of their projects and policies.”
The European Union reflects this sentiment, emphasising the importance of openness in its democratic system. As publicly funded organisations, they recognise the democratic right of their stakeholders to hold them to account.
The UNDP identifies its stakeholders as the parliaments, tax payers and public of their donor and programme countries.
The World Bank and IMF both report increased demand for accountability following the financial crisis, the former promising to hold itself to the same human rights standards it expects of its member states.
The Secretariat is a publicly funded body mandated to act in the ‘common interest of the people’. As such it must adopt an access to informational policy which facilitates civic engagement and accountability. This will increase the legitimacy of the Secretariat as a democratic organisation and improve the effectiveness of its policy outcomes.
The rhetoric of the object clauses are mostly supported by substantive policy provisions. Whilst not entirely compliant with international standards, they are substantially more progressive than the Secretariat’s practices.
The Secretariat currently operates a ‘positive list’ approach to disclosure, voluntarily publishing a limited range of documents on its website on a routine basis. Documents include ministerial communiqués, commonwealth declarations, newsletters, speeches, statements, reports and strategic documents.
This discretionary ‘positive list’ policy presumes the confidentiality of undisclosed documents without considering the nature of the information’s content or the interests at stake. All of the aforementioned interstate organisations have abandoned ‘positive lists’ in favour of the principle of ‘maximum disclosure’.
The World Bank regards this as the ‘paradigm shift’ in its policy whilst the Council of Europe explains that now “transparency is the rule and confidentiality the exception.”
The principle of maximum disclosure is formulated to maximise the availability of information, guaranteeing access to information as a fundamental human right. The principle has two features.
Firstly it presumes that all information is eligible for disclosure on request, unless specified under the exemption schedules.
Secondly, there must be an obligation to routinely publish a specified list of documents. Applying this obligation to as broad a range of documents as possible at various developmental stages facilitates civil society involvement whilst reducing the costs associated with information requests. All of the aforementioned policies comply with both features of the maximum disclosure principle.
The Secretariat must broaden its practice of routine disclosure, establish it as a duty and reverse the presumption of confidentiality for unpublished documents. This would represent a substantial departure from current practice and a positive step towards compliance with international standards.
The presumption of disclosure is not absolute and is constrained by the principle of limited exemptions. Confidentiality may be upheld in narrowly defined circumstances for the protection of legitimate interests from specified harms. This requires a case by case assessment and does not permit blanket exclusions based on official classifications or document type.
The Council of Europe schedule is weakest, excluding all classified information from disclosure. The World Bank refuses to disclose information falling within its schedule as it “could” cause harm, presuming confidentiality and failing to engage in an individual assessment of relevant interests. Some exemptions are overly broad, including those relating to ‘corporate administrative matters’ and ‘deliberative information’.
Similarly, the UNDP excludes ‘draft documents’ entirely, limiting the scope for civil society engagement.
The European Union has two exemption schedules. The first complies with international standards, citing legitimate interests. It is also the only schedule with a ‘severability clause’, allowing for the partial publication of documents. A second schedule entirely excludes ‘sensitive documents’ from disclosure due to their confidentiality statuses.
It is critical that exemptions are subject to a ‘public interest override’. If the public interest in disclosure is greater than the likely harm, then there must be an obligation to disclose. The UNDP and Council of Europe policies both lack public interest overrides. The World Bank only provides a discretionary override which can also be reversed to withhold information otherwise routinely disclosed.
The European Union only provides a public interest override for two categories of ‘interests’ under its first schedule and none under the second. The Secretariat must note that these policies fail to provide adequate safeguards against the abuse of the limited exemptions principle.
Documents ‘excluded’ from disclosure must only retain their confidentiality for as long as the public interest demands. Retention schedules must also be available to respondents whose applications are refused. Documents that are scheduled for destruction are presumed to be of no use to the originator, and therefore disclosure cannot be deemed harmful to the public interest.
It is the Secretariat’s blanket policy to retain the confidentiality of all undisclosed documents for thirty years. They are then only made publicly available subject to the Secretariat’s discretion and the consent of concerned third parties. None of the interstate organisations analysed have a default thirty year declassification period.
The European Union and the Council of Europe both set thirty years as the maximum period for refusing disclosure. Within this limit, the European Union provides that excepted material may only remain confidential for the period which it remains harmful.
The Council of Europe and World Bank adopt tiers of confidentiality with limitation periods dependant on document type. The former has periods of one, ten and thirty years and the latter has periods of five, ten and twenty years.
The UNDP does not specify its declassification periods. When initiating reforms the Secretariat must strive to disclose confidential information as promptly as the public interest test allows.
International standards require that refusals to disclose documents are accompanied with reasons and the availability of two tiers of appeal. The independence of the second tier must be guaranteed. The Secretariat has no procedure for requesting documents and therefore no appeals mechanism.
The European Union provides the opportunity for a ‘confirmatory request’ to the original decision maker followed by an appeal to an Independent Ombudsman or the Court of First Instance. This does not apply to ‘sensitive documents’.
The World Bank and UNDP provide for a first review by an internal panel and a secondary review by an independent panel. The World Bank only permits appeals where a prima facie case is made of a policy violation or where there is a public interest case to be made for disclosure. Appeals on the latter ground may not be heard by the secondary panel, meaning the public interest is never determined independently.
The Council of Europe does not have an appeals mechanism. The Secretariat must incorporate a two tier appeals mechanism with a guarantee of independence into its information disclosure policy.
Information request procedures must be accessible and user-friendly, communicating decisions or the requested documents promptly and at a reasonable price. The aforementioned policies all adopt provisions to this effect.
The Secretariat only permits access to unpublished public documents by appointment at the library of its London headquarters, refusing to provide copies. This is extremely restrictive for the majority of commonwealth citizens. Increased accessibility must become a reform priority.
The Secretariat has the opportunity to advance to the forefront of international transparency and democratic standards by adopting a progressive access to information policy. It must undertake reforms immediately in the spirit of transparency with the maximum involvement of Commonwealth stakeholders.
This consultation, along with an assessment of existing access to information policies and model laws, will greatly assist the Secretariat in remedying the deficiencies of its current practices and enable the Commonwealth to better pursue its goals of freedom, democracy and sustainable development.
March 30, 2010
caribbeannetnews
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)