Abatement As Bait

My father used to tell me, "the law is an ass if only a minority of people respect it".

Recently, there were two competing entertainment series in Negril, Jamaica. As has now become the norm, the separate promoters were in negotiations with the local police about crowd and traffic control, among other services which would be required of the state security apparatus. One group, it is reported, completely agreed with the band of charges requested by the police. It is alleged that initially, the second group, while agreeing to the base price for constables, balked at the two accelerated rates for higher ranking officers.

Eventually, the first events went ahead before the outstanding issue was resolved. It could be merely coincidental that the event for one group was allowed to go way beyond the legal cut-off time under the Noise Abatement Act, meanwhile, the group which had not yet settled their dispute over police pay was ordered to shut down their event shortly after the deadline. Was a subtle message being sent to the relevant promoters? Needless to say, the situation was "amicably" resolved the next day, levelling the playing field, so to speak, and thereafter, both series went ahead uninterrupted by the restrictions under the Act.

Conflict of Interest

I bring this issue to light not because the promoters are carping about it, nor to impugn anyone's credibility, but to demonstrate the inherent conflict of interest. You see, the Jamaica Constabulary Force has the direct state responsibility for granting approval for the staging of events under the Noise Abatement Act. However, they also have the right to advise a private promoter as to how many and what ranks of officers are required to provide monitoring and control of the said activity. But because there are no officially prescribed fees for police officers providing these services, the fees charged often vary from one event to the other, from one parish to the next, with no obvious rationality, making the determination seem at best, arbitrary. Yes, one could say it is left up to negotiations, but what happens when these attempts breakdown or the resolution is not to the total satisfaction of the officers? Under these circumstances, is it not possible that this may lead to the abuse of the delegated power of the state in the selfish self-interest of particular local elements of the JCF?

While I support the Noise Abatement Act in principle, the law becomes a shackle if citizens are not provided with the appropriate outlets for entertainment purposes and creative expression. Now don't get me wrong, when it comes to street dances, I firmly believe that the law should be strictly applied, because these usually occur in the middle of a residential community, but we all know of very famous weekly street dances in favoured constituencies that go on until 9 or 10 am the next day, without molestation. In this light, I truly believe that the country has to re-examine this issue in the context of developing entertainment zones and venues in every parish where live events may be staged beyond what is now the legal cut-off time.

What's Good for the Goose...

I would also like to see the law being policed more even-handedly. It is my impression that secular events, especially popular musical events, suffer the brunt of our new commissioner's policy of applying the law in its strictest terms. For example, in my community, we live about 500 yards by the crow flies, from a church with the worst-sounding band that one could imagine, and a pastor who sings off-key and threatens brimstone and fire in the majority of his sermons. I know this, because the church has loud speakers inside and outside the building, turned up so high, that the entire district has to suffer through their services from dawn until way past dusk every Sunday. Then when they have their special weekday services and regular conventions, the disturbance goes on every night for an entire week. Yet, I have never heard of them being cautioned or warned by the police under the relevant act.

In fact, this has been occurring for more than a decade, without respite. So, even if they have been warned, it has had no practical effect. I have raised this issue many times with my police friends and the response is always the same- "we do not want to seem anti-religious'. In the same community, as a standard practice, relatively small domestic gatherings, like house parties, children's birthday parties, fundraising drives and charity events and even nine nights, are ordered to turn down the volume or end their proceedings, in accordance with the law. For poor people, it is beginning to seem that even in their own modest hovels, they are no longer free to enjoy themselves. This leads me then to ask, when is noise noise? The Act does not define it. It only says once it is audible over 100 metres, but it would seem that our cultural norms have coloured it.

I have been listening to and reading all the glowing comments by officialdom about the great feats of our athletes at the recently concluded Olympic Games, and I endorse them heartily. Especially those proposing improved sports infrastructure to enhance the skills, preparation and treatment of our local athletes. The concept of using our international dominance of track and field to diversify our tourism product is also an exciting innovation that is long overdue. The same should hold true for our music and live entertainment, which already has been making significant contributions to the local economy and society.

The stark absence of appropriate facilities for local outdoor entertainment is even more bewildering in a country whose music has gained such worldwide popularity. Reggae brings more and more visitors to our shores annually, yearning for a firsthand experience of its live offerings. The perennial official excuse has always been prioritising scarce state resources. Added to that these days, we are told that Dancehall simply is not worth it. So, people are forced to stage events in venues with inadequate basic facilities at inappropriate locations, only to face lock-down or prosecution. The entertainment sector has an uncertain future, and I predict that the society is at risk of social upheaval, unless all sectors come together to address these matters, resolve them and take the necessary action in our common interest. To borrow a recent phrase of Bill Clinton, people "are more impressed with the power of our example, rather than the example of our power".

Host: http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/lifestyle/html/20080830T230000-0500_139662_OBS_ABATEMENT_AS_BAIT_.asp