SOEs: Human rights concerns and constitutionality being challenged

The human rights advocacy agency, Jamaicans for Justice, has taken challenged the Government's continuous use of States of Emergency without the accompanying regulations to govern the measure.

Mickel Jackson, Executive Director of Jamaicans for Justice, complained Tuesday on Radio Jamaica’s Beyond the Headlines that she is yet to see the regulations despite a fresh round of SOEs being implemented in Clarendon and St James.

She asserted that the move is a violation of human rights.

“We reiterate that the regulations are not just a tool, to say we have passed some legal test in Parliament around whether or not the declaration is somehow adhering to some parliamentary guidelines…”

To the contrary, she argued, the regulations “indicate to people what rights will be abridged during this period. What are my responsibilities when the police pull me over? What sort of question I would be forced to answer.”

These, she stressed, are important matters to consider, “and if the public is not aware of what right would be curtailed, then it is a violation, in our estimation.”

Constitutionality

The Parliamentary Opposition has also moved to have the courts determine the constitutionality of SOEs pertaining to the manner in which they are being used by the Government.

Opposition Spokesperson on National Security Peter Bunting said his People’s National Party was  seeking two declarations from the court regarding the constitutionality of the imposition of the security measure.

The first declaration seeks to determine whether the previous SOEs were constitutional, specifically whether they were imposed “for any legitimate purpose, specified in Section 20 of the Constitution…”

The second declaration is being sought on whether the extension of the SOEs beyond the initial fourteen days is in keeping with the constitution.