The relevance to Guyana of the IDB’s findings on crime in the Caribbean

Jun 03, 2017 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
Kaieteur News of 22nd May 2017 informs us about the findings of a study done by the Inter -American Development Bank (IDB) concluded in Barbados, Trinidad and Tobago, Jamaica, Bahamas and Suriname. While there are many aspects of the study deserving attention, such in-depth scrutiny would demand extensive space and likely test the editor’s patience to find same for a letter. Therefore, for now I will only focus on the Victimization Survey approach and the study’s call for proactive policing and examine what meaning/ relevance these have for Guyana.
Universally there are two popular sources for obtaining statistics on crime. These are Victimization Survey and police record. We are told that it was the Victimization Survey (VS) method that was used for gathering data on crime for this IDB study. The VS survey was developed in the USA 1973, it attempts to capture crimes committed that were not reported to the police and therefore would not appear in police record.
The VS approach usually entails researchers visiting homes and questioning occupants over the age of 12 years whether they had suffered from or perpetuated any criminal act. This type of survey tends to cover all crimes except murder and arson. Some time ago I wrote on the dark figure of crimes; crimes that for whatsoever reason(s), victims choose not to report to the police and therefore will not appear in police records.
It is such crimes that the VS seeks to uncover. When these crimes are added to reported crimes, a more accurate crime figure is achieved. For example, when data collected by way of VS was added to crimes appearing in police records it was estimated that 6 million crimes of violence occurred in the USA in 1990. However, only about 40% of these were reported to the police. A previous letter referred to above, also offered reasons for victims not reporting crimes to the police. But even though VS is likely to help us obtain a truer estimation of the overall amount of crime committed in a specific community or nation, the method also has its shortcomings/limitations.
It is not unusual for individuals to lie about being victims or perpetuators of criminal acts. Possibly they do so to impress the listener (in VS cases, the interviewer) that their lives are filled with excitement, acts of bravery or to gain sympathy by casting themselves as victims. Years ago, in Guyana I use to visit a certain place at which a few persons, known to be involved in street crime would hang out. As they shared their experiences every contributor seemed to have a more exciting story to tell than the fellow who preceded him.
Here in the USA with increasable regularity police receive calls and visits from persons anxious to confess of having committed crimes that later investigation reveal they could not have possibly committed. Since VS relies on what is told and there is usually no attempt to check authenticity its accuracy is questionable. Secondly VS can only gather information from those victims or perpetuators of crimes who are willing to talk to those conducting the survey. Reclusive persons are less likely to talk to researchers regardless of the extent of their victimization.
If Guyana is going to undertake the VS type of survey I would suggest that this could be more effectively done using the posted questionnaire. This eliminates the temptation of participants playing to the audience since response will demand no names, no addresses of participants and will offer no interviewers for respondents to be tempted to impress. Questionnaires accompanied with return envelope that carries stamp and return address (thus not saddling participants with a cost), can be placed randomly in mail boxes.
The call by the IDB report for police departments in the Caribbean to focus on proactive policing is in keeping with trends here in the USA, and indeed much of the developed world. Proactive policing refers to action by police officers and departments intended to prevent criminal acts from occurring – crime prevention. Proactive policing takes many forms and police departments lay emphasis on different approaches, usually emphasis is determined by available resources.
For example, in a poor country like Guyana and those of the Caribbean emphasis would be placed on encouraging citizens to place bars on windows and doors of homes; and encouraging vehicle owners to mark relatively easy to remove parts of their vehicles. Since marked items are more difficult to sell. Increasing police patrols is also a proactive activity since police presence tends to deter crime and give citizens a feeling of safety and security. But there are approaches to proactive policing that is worrying and present a threat to democracy.
Proactive arresting – police crackdown is one such approach. Crackdown is usually defined as “intense, short term increase in officer presence and arrests for specific types of offences or for all offences in specific areas.” The problem with this approach to proactive policing is that it gives rise to police eroding the rights of specific communities and individuals, for example, raids on specific communities, the harassing of ex criminals even when there are no grounds for suspecting criminal intent, unwarranted stop and search of people from poor communities etc. Aside from its threat to individual freedom the success of this approach to proactive policing is questionable.
Here in the USA where this approach is frequently used in poor, disorganized communities it has been found that crime moved to neighboring communities. Adam Harris’s observation in Kaieteur News of 28th May 2017 that serious crime in Guyana seems to be increasing in Berbice, could possibly be criminal response to intense police activities in the city.
I would suggest that Guyana double down on strengthening its community policing approach as the vehicle for the delivery of proactive policing. Community policing seeks to establish a relationship between police and community that is typified by trust, respect and a willingness to work together in the interest of establishing a safe community.
The IDB study is useful to Guyana, since it indicates an approach for determining the level of crime in the society and suggests a possible response to crime. However, the IDB method for gathering information used in its study and its suggested response to crime should not be conceived as providing us with approaches that should be copied and used in Guyana without consideration of their appropriateness to Guyana. In life others, friends can help us only so far, there are some things we will have to figure out for ourselves.
Claudius Prince

---

---