Why Have Two DPPs Ignored Coroners Courts in Favor of Suspect IMPACS Report?

At a rally shortly before the 2011 general elections a campaigning Kenny Anthony claimed he had seen what he described as a police death list of “targeted persons deemed to be criminals.” In August 2013, after several months back in office, Prime Minister Anthony recalled during a much anticipated televised speech that in the aftermath of a 2010 police operation labeled Operation Restore Confidence—and endorsed by the previous administration—some twelve citizens had met their deaths. Some were saddened by the news, he pointedly added, while others had applauded because it meant a much needed reduction in the island’s crime rate, homicide in particular.

On the other hand, the prime minister continued, “these killings described as extra-judicial executions” had attracted the attention of the United States. He quoted from the State Department’s Country Report on Human Rights Practices in Saint Lucia for 2011: “There were twelve potentially unlawful fatal shootings during the year, some reportedly committed by officers associated with an ad hoc task force within the police department.”

Unlike the local coroners courts that had returned “death by lawful act” verdicts, the prime minister disclosed, the United States believed it had credible evidence of gross violations of human rights in Saint Lucia and in consequence had imposed sanctions on the police. By the prime minister’s measure, it was reasonably clear the U.S. did not have confidence in the outcome of the inquest to bring those responsible for the killings to justice. “The presumption seems to be that the killings were unlawful,” he said.

In consequence, the prime minister revealed, “the United States has disallowed several officers from proceeding on further training or participating in programs organized or funded by the U.S.” He confirmed that the island’s police commissioner had recently been prevented from traveling to the United States where he was scheduled to attend a Conference of Black Executives. The U.S. had also suspended all assistance to the Royal Saint Lucia Police Force. “It is in the interest of all concerned,” he declared, “that the full facts of what occurred be disclosed, not only to satisfy the United States but also, importantly, to clear those officers whose reputations are all at risk.”

His government had therefore invited the Trinidad-based CARICOM Implementation Agency for Crime and Security (IMPACS) to identify three senior officers from the Jamaica Constabulary to investigate the so-called extra-judicial killings, to evaluate all available evidence and determine whether or not further investigation was needed.

Meanwhile new legislation would be enacted to permit investigations of the type proposed. The prime minister reassured citizens his government would continue to work closely with the United States to resolve the issue. At times like these, he emphasized, “we must follow the rule of law as enshrined in our Constitution. We must do this, not only for the Americans but also for ourselves.” Which straightaway invited urgent concerns. For instance: What action had the prime minister taken when as House opposition leader he had admittedly seen with his own eyes a “death list of targeted persons?” Did he perchance alert the Saint Lucia police?

Since the Leahy Law specifies prohibitions against suspected violators of human rights “shall not apply if the Secretary of State determines and reports” that the relevant government is taking effective steps to bring responsible parties to justice, why then were sanctions imposed on the Saint Lucia Police Force when inquests were underway?

Why were the sanctions not lifted at the conclusion of the 2013 inquests that exonerated the suspects in six fatal police shootings? And since inquests can legally be reopened by the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, depending on stated guidelines including reasonable complaints supported by new and compelling evidence, why was it necessary to undertake an IMPACS-supported investigation at a time when, by the prime minister’s own word, the inquests had not been completed?

On the evening of March 2015, with general elections imminent—and the inquests still incomplete!—Prime Minister Kenny Anthony addressed the nation via TV to spill the beans controversially presented him by his handpicked Jamaican investigators. He repeated a section of the U.S. Foreign Assistance Act of 1961: “Where funds are withheld from any unit the Secretary of State shall promptly inform the foreign government of the basis for such action and shall, to the maximum extent practicable, assist the foreign government in taking effective measures to bring the responsible members of the security to justice.”

As if Saint Lucia were not as much a sovereign nation as America, with its own justice system, the prime minister hinted at his primary concern: “The stark reality we confront is that the United States will only lift those sanctions if in their judgment all necessary steps have been taken by the affected country . . . In effect, if the sanctions are to be removed we must show proof we are taking corrective steps to deal with the situation.”

Conceivably due process in Saint Lucia was not representative of “corrective steps” as defined by the United States. Evidently closer to what the U.S. had in mind was the IMPACS investigation initiated by the Kenny Anthony government, replete with its own particular terms of reference. In all events the prime minister not only fingered two leading members of the police force, but he also cited “extremely damning” findings, among them that “the crime problem in Saint Lucia is facilitated by unidentified corrupt politicians, government officials, business persons and police officers.” Additionally, all the shootings reviewed were “fake encounters staged by the police to legitimize their actions.” Weapons supposedly found at the scene of alleged extra-judicial killings were from sources other than victims. Planted evidence!

The Jamaican investigators also confirmed “the blacklist or death lists referenced by the media, human rights organizations, victims families and citizens alike did exist.” All of which seemed to the prime minister’s earlier declaration that during his election campaign he had himself “seen such a list!”

Recently the U.S. ambassador in Barbados, Linda Taglialatela, at a press conference in Saint Lucia announced that some of the sanctions on the RSLPF would be lifted, welcome news that meant its immigration and marine units would again have “full U.S. security assistance.” Local police will also have access to special training programs at home and in the U.S. In relation to the sanctions, the ambassador referenced “an independent group that came in and did investigations but did not follow procedures acceptable under Saint Lucia law.”

It will be up to the DPP what happens next. Contrary to earlier assertions, the ambassador said the U.S. had never demanded anyone be charged, let alone be declared guilty of gross violations of human rights in Saint Lucia. All it had demanded of the authorities with regard to the allegations was due process. As for prosecutions, the ambassador repeated herself: it was now up to the DPP’s office to decide its next move.

What remains discombobulating is that for some seven years the authorities have concentrated only on the increasingly contentious investigation by members of the Jamaica Constabulary and the concomitant actions of the previous administration—with no reference to the unchallenged verdicts handed down by Saint Lucia’s coroners courts in 2013 and 2016? In the present circumstances, perhaps the DPP will soon explain!