The IMPACS Report: Diplomatic, Not Legal Solution Needed

By Neville Cenac

Former Foreign MinisterAS an independent state, Saint Lucia is equal in status with every other nation both in its internal and external affairs. Each is under a duty however, to live in comity with the other. Mercifully, providence has placed us under the belly of the richest and most powerful of all nations, the United States, like us, once a colony of the United Kingdom. We share the same fundamental values: faith in God, democracy and the rule of law. In addition, we speak the same language. We could not wish for better friends, with Canada also at our side. We are blessed. However, as citizens of this planet, our destinies are braided together. Thus, some dependency automatically comes into the reckoning, no matter where we fall in any scheme or ranking. We were born for each other. No one is useless.

Saint Lucia, that little slice of heaven, has been a most law-abiding nation. The sudden accumulation of wealth (with drugs at its side), has brought about a rapid decaying of the Caribbean’s solitary boast, which we are, I make bold to say. With dangerous gangs mushrooming everywhere, murder, house breaking, theft, molesters and street urchins, Saint Lucia’s reputation as a safe tourist destination has plummeted to a frightening degree over the past 12 years. Our very existence was endangered. We were developing a hate of the dearest thing to us, our country. The government was under pressure, the police at its wits end, citizens all crying for help from both, “save us or we perish”, being the common plea. During that state of hopelessness twelve were shot. The nation breathed a sigh of relief and a wonderful feeling of repose pervaded the entire country as the marauders retreated, to fight another day.

Nothing I have said here is intended to justify any unlawful killing. We are governed by the rule of law which ensures that Saint Lucia does not degenerate into a police state. It is then that no one would be safe, except those who rule by force of arms. Inquests having declared the killings lawful however, our great friend and benefactor, the United States, greatly suspicious of the findings, imposed certain preliminary sanctions on us. On pain of further pain, it demanded an inquiry into what had already been settled by a lawful inquest. That’s a bit much, considering that innocence was established in the ordinary legal manner, to wit, an inquest.

It is gratifying to know that even when we are in our graves there is a country on earth to ask questions regarding human rights, and to protect those still living. We should have no quarrels whatsoever with such humanistic interventions. In such cases the nature of the soul of that country is revealed, “an attribute to God Himself”. But in this case, there is an overriding warning to be considered, and it is this: Should we banish all wisdom, and burn the barn to kill a rat, when an inquest has settled the matter? To put it more directly, should we burn Saint Lucia to settle any dispute? The world knows that Saint Lucia has been a very law-abiding country since the abolition of slavery. The carbuncle in the system, now breaking into corruption is the direct result of high illegitimacy and delinquency, most mothers having to father their children, poverty, unemployment and the inability of succeeding governments to help the police sufficiently in the protection of life and property.

I hold the view and will defend it, that in the governance of a state, there are some legal matters that call for a diplomatic solution and not a legal one. The current situation with the United States falls squarely into that category. It is the lack of diplomatic skills on the part of the government that has drawn us into that difficulty with the United States, from which extrication seems distant, if not impossible. Winning a seat does make a diplomatic of a Minister for Foreign Affairs. They are a special breed of men. They are good listeners. They are soft spoken. They ruffle no feathers. Their stock-in-trade is reason and judgement, the finest tools of persuasion.

The description of a diplomat as “an honest man, sent abroad to lie for the good of his country” could only be intended for humour. What it surely suggests is, that no stone would be left unturned to put his country in the best possible light. In that sense, a Prime Minster is not the most important person in a government. The Minister for Foreign Affairs represents half the face of the country and since a country is known by its laws, the Attorney-General, being responsible for them bears a higher traction than the Prime Minister; and the other ministers being mere “hewers of wood and drawers of water” in his eyes, are almost insignificant as he also controls the public purse.

The present situation in which Saint Lucia has been plunged is not, therefore, the making of the DPP. In the first place, the Prime Minister has been riding two horses in different directions by asking to prosecute the police, while, at the same time, negotiating financial settlements with those marked for slaughter by him in his solemn address to the nation on “IMPACS”. The two cannot waltz together for they are incompatibles.

In that uncertain state of affairs so created by the government, any thinking DPP, already saturated to dripping by that inundation of the worst criminal offences in our history, would have given priority to the strong current of offences that was carrying both Saint Lucia and herself into the deep. It was not that she was lying at anchor. Moreover, the criminal courts, fed by her, had been long bursting at the seams, saddled as the judges were with the flow from her office. To this day, the government that relies on the DPP and the courts to bring all criminals to justice has left their groans unattended. And a matter that calls for a diplomatic solution cannot be addressed by the same government that is now burdening the courts, though the results are highly likely to set armed policemen against policemen and turn the country upside down. That is why I insist that the answer lies in summoning such diplomatic skills that would bring home to the United States that in this crisis, jailing policemen would only carry us further into the deep.

It is my sincere belief that that approach would have taught the police a lesson, including the perpetrators of crime who would come to realize that the nation’s attention would be now fully focussed on their every move. If compensation needs to be paid for any apparent unlawful killing (brought about by the spate of crimes), then let it be, but let us remain eternally vigilant in defence of our country’s long established good name.

In my opinion, the DPP has been circumspect and prudent in the circumstances. It is the diplomatic skill of the government that needs sharpening.