Senior Reporter
dareece.polo@guardian.co.tt
The Opposition has rejected claims that Zones of Special Operations (ZOSO) legislation could have prevented the Belmont triple murder that left a toddler dead, even as the Government defends the effectiveness of the ongoing State of Emergency (SOE) and continues to promote ZOSO as part of its wider crime strategy.
The political clash comes in the aftermath of Thursday’s shooting in Belmont that claimed the lives of 23-month-old Akini Kafi, his 30-year-old father Aquil Kafi and family friend Anthony Wilson, 28. The child’s mother, 36-year-old Antonia Cain-Kafi, remains hospitalised in critical condition.
The incident, which was yesterday linked to a quadruple murder along the Lady Young Road, Morvant, last month by Defence Minister Wayne Sturge, has since intensified scrutiny of the Government’s crime strategy.
Police statistics show a slight decline in killings under the SoE, with 130 murders recorded so far this year compared to 136 over the same period last year. But that marginal reduction is being overshadowed by a recent surge in high-profile violent attacks. Based on data sent last evening, there have been 10 murders so far this month compared to five for the comparative period last year.
Still, the Government yesterday maintained that the emergency measures are delivering results.
“Of course, the State of Emergency is working. The amount of murders have decreased. I know there are instances recently, especially yesterday (Thursday), but it doesn’t mean that the state of emergency is not working,” Justice Minister Devesh Maharaj said on his way to yesterday’s sitting of Parliament.
Homeland Security Minister Roger Alexander, when asked about whether Government was considering curfew as he arrived outside Parliament, dismissed the idea of additional restrictions.
“No, no. The people of Laventille didn’t want any ZOSO through their minister (MP), not so?” he quipped.
But Attorney General John Jeremie offered no public defence of the SoE when questioned about whether additional measures such as a curfew were being considered, or whether he believes the SoE is effective.
As pressure mounts, however, the Opposition has described the Government’s approach as a failure.
“This State of Emergency is a waste of time. It is an egregious trespass on the constitutional rights of the citizens of Trinidad and Tobago. It has had absolutely no effect and the Prime Minister should immediately bring an end to this SoE charade because it is not working,” Opposition chief whip Marvin Gonzales said outside the House.
Former national security minister Stuart Young also weighed in, saying the SoE has failed despite being the strongest legal tool available to the State.
“We are in a State of Emergency. Under the Constitution, there is nothing worse that can be done to suspend our constitutional rights than a state of emergency. So, if we’re living under a state of emergency, and it’s not working, and we’re seeing these sort of mass shootings, and you look at the number of shells afterwards—over 30. Something is seriously wrong. And it’s not about carrying on the way we are,” said Young.
Alexander doubles
down on claim
While debate over the SoE continues, attention has again shifted to ZOSOs, with one Government minister facing criticism over claims it could have prevented the Belmont killings.
Minister in the Housing Ministry Phillip Edward Alexander has been at the centre of controversy, after suggesting on social media that a ZOSO presence in Belmont could have saved the child.
Alexander took to Facebook on Thursday to share, “That two-year-old would be alive right now if Belmont was under a ZOSO and in the control of law enforcement and the army with Social Development reinventing lives to prosperity and peace.”
He also wrote: “Gunmen, gangs and government corruption, drug empires using abandoned human capital as their human resource, the PNM cancer in Belmont has metastasised to the bone.
“A ZOSO in Belmont would have transformed that community back to functional but would have robbed the drug lords financing the PNM of their cheap expendable labour.”
Defending his comments yesterday outside the Parliament, Alexander said the country as a whole must accept responsibility for the violence.
“We failed that little two-year-old child, you know. We as a nation failed. But we can’t continue to push this under the rug and pretend that it is okay to say, ‘don’t politicise crime’.
“Every single election that has been fought in the last 20 years were fought on crime. We can’t escape the fact that crime is the number one issue affecting the people of Trinidad and Tobago,” Alexander said.
But Laventille West MP Kareem Marcelle strongly rejected the argument.
“He’s (Phillip Alexander) so dunce that he does not even understand what is in the bill. Cause clearly, anyone who understands what was in the proposed ZOSO would tell you that the State of Emergency gives much more expansive powers to the State.”
Marcelle also criticised the Government for failing to publicly distance itself from the remarks.
“It is very unfortunate that if it is, in fact, not the view of the Honourable Prime Minister and her Government, that they have not distanced themselves from these very unfortunate, disgusting and insensitive remarks made.”
Meanwhile, Young also pushed back on the ZOSO argument, saying its powers are, in fact, more limited than an SoE, making the comparison flawed. He suggested that if amendments are being considered, a Joint Select Committee should be established to allow structured discussion between Government, Opposition and Independent voices.
Young also questioned why previously dismantled youth development programmes could not be restored immediately to support vulnerable communities, arguing that such interventions should operate independently of emergency legislation.
He further called for accountability at the highest level, insisting that the Ministers of Homeland Security and Defence should resign, and warned that continued reliance on emergency powers without results shows that “something is seriously wrong.”
Former national security minister and police commissioner Gary Griffith also took to social media yesterday to challenge the Government on its belief that ZOSOs were more powerful than an SoE.
In a response, Griffith said, “To state that during a State of Emergency, if ZOSO was approved, that it could have prevented recent murders, is as ridiculous a statement as you can get. A ZOSO is a virtual subset of a State of Emergency (SoE). It provides the same extra law enforcement powers and removal of constitutional rights, that you get in a SoE, but only in specific areas.
“In other words, a SoE allows for a nationwide ZOSO. If you have a State of Emergency, then there is nothing stopping you from targeting specific areas to establish Zones of Special Operations. Instead of finger-pointing and playing the blame game, just focus on the mission please.”
