Philipsburg:--- All of us as young people must be fully cognizant of the fact that, in recent times, St. Kitts and Nevis has recorded an unprecedented increase in violent crime and murders. These crimes particularly affect young people, especially when it comes to gang-related activity and when considering the fact that the majority of gun-crime victims are under 25 years of age.In my view, the escalating wave of violent crime and murders now presents a serious national security crisis for the Federation and we cannot speak of or realise any meaningful national development unless we can first ensure the security of our people.
We lost a heart-stopping 27 of our fellow sons and daughters of the soil to murder in 2009 (a new record) and it appears that we are on track to tie this appalling record as thus far there have been 19 homicides in 2010. Even though it is often claimed that "crime happens everywhere", we can put this into perspective. Our population comprises, let's say, roughly 40,000 persons; we have had 19 homicides. For comparison purposes, Grenada with a population of 100,000 has had 5 murders for 2010. At a rate of 2.4 murders per month, violent crime has now become the leading cause of death among our young men. It is a matter for deep regret and concern that many of these recent homicides remain unsolved today.
It is against this backdrop, we are told, that the Interception of Communication Bill is being proposed by the Government. It is interesting that the proposal for the Bill seems to emanate, not from the Ministry of National Security, or in conjunction with it, but from the Ministry of Information.
According to the Honourable Minister of Information, Senator Nigel Carty, the Bill will give power to public authorities to obtain a Court order to intercept communication by cell phones, land-lines, telegraphs [OK, who uses telegraphs these days?], wireless networks and devices, mailing systems including parcels and couriers, and other means of communication – so, basically, nothing would be off-limits.
The Honourable Minister told the media that when this proposed legislation becomes law, it will help to solve crimes which have been problematic to solve before. The Attorney General, the Honourable Patrice Nisbett, has stated that the Bill will be broad-reaching and it extends to both capital crimes and non-capital crimes.
Now let us examine this more closely and scrutinize it carefully. Even though the Bill is not yet before the Honourable House, it cannot hurt to form an opinion on it from a young person's point of view.
Section 3 of the Constitution of St. Kitts and Nevis stipulates:
"Whereas every person in Saint Christopher and Nevis is entitled to the fundamental rights and freedoms, that is to say, the right, whatever his race, place of origin, birth, political opinions, colours, creed or sex, but subject to respect for the rights and freedoms of others and for the public interest, to each and all of the following, namely-
c) protection for his personal privacy, the privacy of his home and other property and from deprivation of property without compensation..."
The right to our personal privacy, as this section illustrates, is a fundamental right and freedom which is enshrined in our Federation's Constitution. It is a constitutional guarantee; and as we all know, the Constitution is our supreme law and always takes priority over any Bill which is placed before Parliament.
As I understand it, our Constitutional rights can only be limited by something that is "in the public interest". This Interception of Communication Bill is probably going to be introduced under that premise – that is, that the Bill is proposed in the public interest and should therefore be passed on that basis.
But is it really in the public interest to pass this particular Bill, even against the backdrop of the unprecedented crime and murder wave?
Decades ago, George Orwell's famous novel entitled 1984 had warned us all very gravely against the rise of "Big Brother" and the intrusion of "Big Brother" into our personal lives and liberty.
As young people we must realize that this Bill proposes a restriction on our personal freedoms which are guaranteed by the Constitution. We cannot shy away from that fact or pretend that it is otherwise. It is immaterial that the Bill will not be used on all of us in the country and only a few of us. It is a limitation. Any violation of my neighbour's freedom is a violation of mine.
It is the rise of Big Brother. And, I assert, it is not in the public's best interest.
Let me say plainly, for the avoidance of doubt and question, I am not any criminal. I am not backing up for any criminals or defending their atrocious and horrendous activities. But seriously, what is the Government really thinking they will overhear when they listen in on a conversation of these criminals? It's a serious question, because the criminals these days are much more sophisticated and aware, as I'm sure we can all imagine. So what do they think they will hear these criminals say, after they get the Judge to make a Court order? And what do they think they will see when they intercept some text messages? "Yo David, this Brian. I using Andrea phone. Don't forget we robbing Stone Walls first thing tomorrow morning eh. Shawn say he want come with us. You still picking me up in you blue jeep right?"
You get the picture.
Now, let's be real. How many unsolved crimes do YOU honestly think will this Bill help to solve?
And by the way, how much has crime gone down since the Government put up surveillance cameras in various places around Basseterre?
As I said before, I am no criminal. I have no intention of committing any crime. I like my house. And frankly, I could not last even an hour in prison. But I'm sure many of us young people know how annoying it is when your Mom or Dad is looking over your shoulder on the computer while you're chatting on MSN or when you're on Facebook, and trying to read what you are doing. How does that make you feel? You're not doing anything criminal or wrong on Facebook. But you want your privacy! And there's nothing wrong with that. It's your right and you deserve it. You are entitled to feel funny about it. We can all relate to this. It's pure vexation, right? When you can't get to enjoy your personal space and privacy like you should?
I must say that Benjamin Franklin put it better than I ever could: "Those who will sacrifice their liberty for a little temporary safety deserve neither." In America, they call it 'fear-mongering'. You see, sometimes, when our leaders want something, they use scare tactics to get their way and place restrictions on the freedom of us law-abiding citizens and then tell us it's for our own good. They will say, "Yes, we can all agree that crime is out of control. Therefore we are going to start checking all communication. Not to worry, we'll get a Judge to sign an Order before we do it to you. You don't want to get robbed do you? Good. Now, let us check all your BB messages."
It's the principle of the thing. We must defend our liberty and our constitutional rights, no matter what.
They want to keep tabs on us. But can any of us keep tabs on them? Bear in mind, the Government leaders are our servants. Their duty is to serve us and encourage our pursuit of happiness. Their duty is not to find ways and means to restrict that. We live in a democracy. And that means we elect them to do our will.
Where is the Freedom of Information Bill, the Bill that will allow us to hold the Government accountable, and let us monitor if they are doing what we put them in office to do? Where is the Integrity in Public Life Bill that will help to prevent corruption and maintain the utmost transparency in government dealings and the affairs of the State?
Does anyone else see a double standard here?
Some persons have been making the argument that other democratic nations have wiretapping laws to prevent crime, so why can't we have it? But guess what. Other countries have Freedom of Information Acts, too. Other countries have Integrity in Public Life Acts, too. Their citizens can know all the goings and comings of their government officials. They are fully abreast of every single expenditure that their governments make. So why can't we? Why don't our leaders lead by example and give up their privacy first?
And, honestly, do we want to give credence to the argument that other countries have this and that law, so we can have this Bill? Do we really want to go there? Because other countries have legalized gay marriage, too. In fact, the legislation in favour of gay marriage is increasing all over the world today. Does that mean it will automatically be good for us? Should we pass these same laws just because other countries are passing them? Seriously?
I will only say, in conclusion, that while government is killing up itself to make this unnecessary and unwarranted intrusion into our personal lives and liberty and monitor us like 'Big Brother', we had better stop and consider this - Who goin' guard the guard?
