
Effective leadership in every sphere requires the existence of trust. A leader’s believability and the willingness of others to carry out instructions and act in the organization’s best interests, even in the absence of explicit situational instructions, are all dependent on trust between the leader and those he or she leads. The ability of members of an organization to discern what is the right, most appropriate, most helpful thing to do in a complex situation in which there is limited space to consult, depends on the degree of trust shared between leader and team members.

The issue of trust is a major element in Jamaica’s management of crime. Without attempting to enumerate all the levels and aspects in which trust is relevant, I am sure that it would be easily agreed that among them would be citizens’ ability to trust law enforcement and the ability of citizens and law enforcement leaders to trust the policy intentions of elected officials / policy makers. An important rider to both (citizens’ ability to trust law enforcement and their and law enforcement leaders’ ability to trust policy makers) is that the historical conduct and words of those who desire or need to be trusted, matter above all else in determining whether they can be trusted.

The issue of trust is a major element in Jamaica’s management of crime.
Recent mass murder in Jamaica
The recent mass murder in Jamaica in which eight people were killed in the parish of Clarendon is a frightening and dastard event which has shocked the nation and naturally has evoked strong responses from the government. The police have assessed that this massacre is linked to a fight among rival gangs over ill-gotten gain and has interconnections with operatives overseas and others who are in prison in Jamaica.

Two elements of the police’s analysis stand out, for me. Firstly, that the root of the mass murders is a conflict over “ill-gotten” (illicit) wealth, and secondly that some of the operatives are in prison, here in Jamaica.
Two elements of the police’s analysis stand out, for me. Firstly, that the root of the mass murders is a conflict over “ill-gotten” (illicit) wealth, and secondly that some of the operatives are in prison, here in Jamaica.
In relation to the issue of operatives who are in prison, the discussion on the need to build a maximum-security modern prison has been re-introduced by Prime Minister Andrew Holness. It will be recalled that in 2015, following intense negotiations between the then PNP administration of Portia Simpson-Miller, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between Jamaica and the United Kingdom for the UK to provide Twenty-five Million pounds or about Five Billion Jamaican Dollars towards the construction of a modern maximum-security prison.
The UK-Jamaica Prison Deal
As public reporting in 2015 had disclosed, I was (at the time) Chief Negotiator with the British High Commission on behalf of the Ministry of National Security where I was a Strategic Projects Consultant. I was involved in the drafting and promulgation of the MOU for the construction of the new maximum-security prison. The process of consultation involved study tours by members of the respective teams (Jamaica and the UK) to each country. Following the tours (in 2014), the negotiations on the MOU began and were completed in 2015.
The main considerations in the conversations and the proposed MOU, which were also in the public domain then, were that:
- Jamaica, since 1997, had recognized that the two maximum-security facilities, the Tower Street Adult Correctional Centre (popularly known as the General Penitentiary) and the St. Catherine District Prison, were in a deplorable condition and posed clear dangers to staff and inmates, and breached international human rights standards.
- Both facilities which were built to accommodate up to 800 inmates were routinely at 200% of capacity with instances in which three adult men occupied a cell that was 8 x 12 ft.
- These facilities were built as holding areas for slaves in the 17th century and their continued use violated principles of human rights to which Jamaica was a signatory.
- Jamaica could not, at the time, due to severe fiscal constraints, afford to fund a project of that magnitude and therefore was open to a partnership with the UK.
- The facility would be built to hold 1,200 inmates, with 300 spaces reserved to place UK prisoners who would be deported to Jamaica legally ahead of the completion of their sentences. These deportations would take place when they have a prescribed minimum portion left on their period of incarceration, and thus the process of reintegration into Jamaica would begin while they are still under close supervision.
- Many of the inmates at both maximum-security facilities were not high-risk, high-security offenders and would be better placed at medium-risk facilities.
- Mindful of the risks to increased recidivism that placing minor or medium risk offenders with hardened and career offenders poses (and unrelated to the negotiations with the UK but supportive of the initiative) the Government of Jamaica had commenced the construction of a 300-bed medium security block at the Tamarind Farm Adult Correctional Centre and the strengthening of programmes across the Jamaican prison system to provide a more effective programme of rehabilitation to inmates.
- Per diem per prisoner would be paid by the UK for each deported prisoner towards his (or her) relocation and reintegration for a defined period.
- Relevant legislative changes would be made to Jamaican (and UK) laws to allow for the relocation of specified eligible inmates.
Both facilities which were built to accommodate to 800 inmates were routinely at 200% of capacity with instances in which three adult men occupied a cell that was 8 x 12 ft.

The MOU with the UK was therefore part of a wider and philosophically driven programme of dealing with crime. This wider programme included the Citizen Security and Justice Programme (CSJP), the Unite for Change initiative, and stronger support for community policing and other ongoing interventions such as the Peace Management Initiative (PMI).
With respect to sociological and philosophical considerations which made the prison deal attractive to the Government, in 2014-15, were:
- The fact that the referenced category of inmates in UK prisons would be deported once they complete their sentence, and given the facility of commencing re-integration earlier, the probability for effective reintegration was increased.
- Holding low-risk and high-risk offenders in the same facility provided the opportunity for high-risk offenders who give orders for murders, while still in prison, to train low-risk offenders who are there on short stays into becoming henchmen. Thus, the threat of orders for murders from behind bars and the increase in the population of hardened criminals could be reduced by separating low / medium and high-risk inmates.
- Jamaica’s image as a country was on the line. How could we as a country be holding people in inhumane and degrading conditions more deplorable than when they held slaves?
Jamaica’s image as a country was on the line. How could we as a country be holding people in inhumane and degrading conditions more deplorable than when they held slaves?
The politicization of the proposal
The UK Prime Minister David Cameron spoke about the proposed deal while on a visit to Jamaica in 2015. His comments were not entirely accurate concerning where the deal had reached as was reported by the Gleaner at the time (https://jamaica-gleaner.com/article/news/20151006/jamaicas-negotiator-disputes-british-govts-claims-about-prisoner-transfer-deal ), but the core issue about the construction of a maximum-security facility was on point.
In response, the Opposition Leader Andrew Holness rebuffed the proposal saying, “Jamaica does not need prisons, it needs schools”.
In response, the Opposition Leader Andrew Holness rebuffed the proposal saying, “Jamaica does not need prisons, it needs schools”.
The issue became a political one with those in support of building the prison being labelled colonial and backward and those against (led by the Opposition) being labelled enlightened and courageous. It was a false dichotomy or perverse binary (either /or) thinking, as the comments by the Prime Minister in the wake of the Cherry Lane massacre have shown. We need both a modern maximum-security facility as well as modern schools.
We need both a modern maximum-security facility as well as modern schools.
In what I would describe as a sleight of hand, Prime Minister Holness suggested in 2017, when the issue of a prison was back in the news, that his government did not reject the prison offer. This comment suggests intellectual dishonesty for the offer was made to the Government of Jamaica. Such comments breed mistrust.
The problem of illicit wealth in Jamaica
Jamaica has a problem with many people, including lawmakers, being involved in illicit means of gaining wealth. The revelation by the police that at the heart of the heinous Cherry Lane massacre (as with others) is a fight over illicit wealth, should give us pause. Given what we have seen about the lengths that people will go to enforce their claims over portions of illicitly obtained wealth, should we not all shudder at the thought that ten (10) lawmakers (8 of whom were tagged in the last two years) are under investigation for illicit wealth?
Prime Minister Holness, in addition to calling for a maximum-security prison that would make it harder for people behind bars to communicate with others outside, has quite rightly visited and sought to comfort victims of Cherry Lane.
I urge PM Holness to acknowledge that his comments about the prison proposal in 2015 were unhelpful as well as take steps to disassociate himself from the 10 lawmakers who are under investigation for illicit enrichment. These actions, I believe, will enhance trust in his leadership.
I urge PM Holness to acknowledge that his comments about the prison proposal in 2015 were unhelpful as well as take steps to disassociate himself from the 10 lawmakers who are under investigation for illicit enrichment. These actions, I believe, will enhance trust in his leadership.
Canute Thompson is Professor of Educational Policy, Planning and Leadership and Director of the Caribbean Centre for Educational Planning at The University of the West Indies, Mona Campus, a social activist, and author of eight books and eighteen journal articles.
His academic achievements include:
Two Principal’s Awards in 2020 for Most Outstanding Researcher and Best Publication for his book, Reimagining Educational Leadership in the Caribbean.
Two Principal’s Awards in 2023 for research activity generating the most funds, and research activity with the most development impacts, serving as Project Director for a project executed by the Caribbean Centre for Educational Planning.
A 2022 Bronze place winner in the Independent Publisher Book Awards for his book, Education and Development: Policy Imperatives for Jamaica and the Caribbean.
A 2021 finalist in The Vice-Chancellor’s Award for Excellence for all-round excellent performance in Outstanding Teaching, Outstanding Research Accomplishments, Outstanding Service to the University Community, Outstanding Public Service.
A 2021 Principal’s Award for Most Outstanding Researcher.