~ Duncan outlines proposal, draft in pipeline ~
PHILIPSBURG--Members of Parliament (MPs) are split on a proposal by Justice Minister Roland Duncan to introduce stiffer penalties for crimes committed against tourists.
The proposal, a draft of which is expected to be submitted to the Council of Ministers next week and, if approved, will go to Parliament, entails punishing thefts committed by one or more persons against tourists with up to six years? imprisonment.
National Alliance (NA) MPs William Marlin (party leader), Louie Laveist and George Pantophlet, independent MP Frans Richardson and United People?s (UP) party MP Johan ?Janchi? Leonard voiced concerns about the proposed policy, with some calling it discriminatory and saying it would contribute to class justice.
However, UP MP Jules James, Democratic Party (DP) MPs Roy Marlin and Leroy de Weever, and independent MP Patrick Illidge support the proposal on the grounds that it will protect St. Maarten?s one pillar tourism industry.
The other MPs in Parliament did not express an opinion. However, President of Parliament Gracita Arrindell (UP) had said during the closing of the 2010-2011 Parliamentary year that there was need for caution regarding the introduction of the stiffer penalties, as the lives and property of residents were no less valuable than those of tourists.
Proposal
Duncan outlined details of the policy during a Central Committee meeting on Tuesday requested by the NA for the minister to explain his intention for the policy.
His draft proposal entails changing article 494 of the criminal code by adding a ?point e? to stipulate that theft committed jointly by two or more persons against tourists here for recreational purposes be punished with six years? imprisonment.
He said theft where the guilty party made his or her way to the crime scene to commit a robbery, committed a break-in, climbing in or entering through the use of false keys were circumstances wherein punishment could be meted out under the draft law.
He said a new point ?d? also would be added to the article that would address stealing with motive of terrorism and other forms of theft and blackmail.
Duncan said St. Maarten spent a lot of money to invite and bring tourists to its shores, charged them ?stiff? fees and he had been disappointed that it was believed no attention should be paid to the visitors.
Duncan said he and Deputy Prime Minister Theo Heyliger had had a meeting with the Florida-Caribbean Cruise Association (FCCA) officials during which concerns about crime had been expressed. He said he thought it would be a good idea to propose legislation to deal with this matter.
His mention of the FCCA meeting sparked a reaction from two NA MPs suggesting that if the FCCA was concerned about crime it should contribute to more blue on the streets and help fund a camera surveillance system that would help police detect crime.
Despite the fierce opposition from some MPs, Duncan stood behind his proposal and urged the MPs to study it once it reached them before taking a position. Duncan said he would go as far as offering police escorts to tourists if need be and said thankfully St. Maarten was not at that stage yet. He said he already had given instructions that stiffer penalties should already be requested in preparation for the law.
�
Class justice
William Marlin and Laveist said such a policy would not have their support, as it would promote class justice in St. Maarten. Marlin ?strongly advised? the minister not to pursue his plan, as it would be sending ?the wrong message to persons who were committing crime.?
?This legislation would tell the criminal if you want to snatch a chain, snatch it from someone who is not a tourist,? he said. ?? All hell would break loose and it would open Pandora?s Box because you would create a special class.?
He asked whether, if the grounds of the law were to protect tourists, the minister would come later with legislation to protect businesspersons, as they provided jobs, or with legislation for stiffer penalties to punish crimes against teachers, as they moulded the future.
Laveist said while he understood the minister?s concern and his wanting to protect St. Maarten?s one-pronged economic industry, the policy should not be pursued. He said the meeting called by NA for clarity on the matter was ?an attempt to save this little island from going down a little slippery slope. It would be discriminatory.?
He encouraged Duncan to hold his thought for the policy for a while, as ?the persons we are looking to protect are the ones we will be hurting.?
After Duncan confirmed that he would be submitting such a proposal, NA MP George Pantophlet said the proposal was dead on arrival and would not have his support. He had queried earlier whether any such legislation existed in Aruba and Cura�ao, to which Duncan later responded ?no.?
Pantophlet said the best way to combat crime was to have more blue on the streets. Pantophlet and Laveist said if the FCCA was so concerned about crime it should help to fund the underfunded Police Force for more blue on the streets.
Independent MP Frans Richardson and UP MP Leonard called for statistics showing the number of crimes committed against tourists as opposed to locals.
Duncan said later that there were ?very low? levels of crime against tourists in Dutch St. Maarten, though there some incidents had taken place in French St. Martin.
William Marlin questioned why the urgency for such an initiative when crimes against tourists were low and when ?so many crimes? were taking place on the island such as the ?snatching of gold and breaking into local homes.
?You hardly hear of breaking into hotel rooms. ? When we single out that crime committed against tourists would be treated more seriously than a crime committed here then we are headed down the wrong track,? he said.
Richardson had said earlier in the meeting that crime affected everyone. ?Crime is crime. It doesn?t have colour or creed when it is committed.?
He said later: ?I agree that punishment must be carried out according to what is happening, but we should be serious to ensure that it is across the board. We need to do things hand-in-hand to make everyone feel at ease. I feel a sense of negativity from the minister, because we are seeing a hike in crime amongst our people, but MPs speak on behalf of what the people are saying. I think legislation needs to come to protect everyone.?
Leonard stressed that he could not distinguish a difference between a tourist and a resident. ?For me everyone is treated equally under the law. ? The justice system is neutral. If someone is guilty, they are guilty, but everyone is treated equally. ?
?As a professional you must work with statistics. You must work with numbers. ? Show me the numbers. Show me the stats. Convince me that there is a need for this. Come with the stats that this is the amount of tourists being attacked.?
Duncan said the criminal code already contained articles that stipulated stiffer penalties for crimes committed against and by certain categories of persons, such as by civil servants, family members, and against MPs. He told MPs, ?So if you?re talking about class justice, then start with yourself.?
Needed
But even as some MPs bashed the proposal several of them said it was very much needed to protect St. Maarten?s tourism industry.
James said he supported the minister?s approach because tourism and crime did not go hand-in-hand. He said it would take one more negative incident against a tourist to tarnish St. Maarten?s image. James said there were other islands that had been were affected severely by crime.
?Cruise lines will take their vessels to other shores to protect their passengers. ? We have a one pillar economy. Tourism is not just our mainstay, but our only stay. We must protect this vital and fragile industry,? he stressed, noting that he would rather see a headline saying, ?St. Maarten last port of call? instead of ?St. Maarten lost port of call.?
He asked whether a resident who was robbed would change his or her place of residence and whether a tourist who was robbed would change his/her destination, responding affirmatively to the latter.
He said it was his personal opinion that selling drugs in a school to young children deserved a stiffer penalty than selling drugs in a bar or a nightclub. ?Yes, I would support legislation for stiffer penalties for crimes against tourists,? he maintained.
De Weever said St. Maarten did not have to reinvent the wheel, as a provisional law already existed that allowed the justice minister to take certain steps relating to penalties for crimes.
He alluded to a decision on one of the Antillean islands where the percentage usually taken off a prisoner?s sentence for good behaviour had been waived for certain crimes and said the Justice Minister had the option to adjust local laws to apply this to crime against tourists. ?The minister has a right to do this and I hope that the minister uses this.?
In defending Duncan, Illidge said the FCCA is the ?big body that controls cruise tourism,? which is what ?we live on,? and the minister?s intention was to protect St. Maarten?s only source of income.
He said that when Duncan had met with the FCCA on the issue of crime, St. Maarten had a problem with crime. Duncan had said earlier that no tourists had been killed in St. Maarten in the crime figures presented by police during the Central Committee meeting on Monday.
Illidge said it ?has been proven that ships can do well without St. Maarten? in motivating his support for the proposal.
Roy Marlin said he didn?t see a problem, as there already were specific cases in which stiffer penalties were attached to certain crimes in the law. He said too that the law had been changed in the past to deal with ?specific situations.?
He also implored MPs to propose legislation they thought was necessary to be debated in Parliament and said they should not create the impression that it was the minister?s job to, for example, impose a passenger fee on cruise passengers.
All MPs were present at the meeting, which began on Monday with two of four agenda points. The agenda point crime and the minister?s intention regarding crime against tourists was handled when the meeting resumed on Tuesday afternoon.
The meeting was adjourned around 10:35pm last night to Friday at 2:00pm when the final agenda point, the Brooks Tower Accord (BTA), will be handled.
Guantánamo Bay Kevin Campbell CVs Russell Brand Mervyn King Oscars
No comments:
Post a Comment