Weapons, choices and economic recovery

As we contemplate the increasingly boldfaced presence of weapon- toting criminals amongst us and ever present armed violence, consider this: The World Health Organisation uses a violence-focused definition to determine areas of violence epidemics based on homicide rates exceeding 10 murders per 100,000 inhabitants.

This puts the Americas, which includes Trinidad and Tobago, as the most violent region in the world.

Latin America and the Caribbean account for less than 10 percent of the world’s population but a third of the world’s homicides.

A recent analysis done by the London School of Economics on Crime and Violence in the Americas and the Caribbean identified that there tends to be a correlation between high homicide rates and the wealth of countries measured by GDP per capita.

It is usually accepted that the higher the income of a country, the lower the incidence of violence. In this country and many countries in this region, the homicide rates are far higher than would be expected given the GDP per capita. One can only imagine how much worse the situation could become if deeper levels of financial insecurity intensify the drivers of crime and violence.

There is a further point to be considered too. The LSE study used a framework of crime economics to analyse the drivers of unusually high levels of armed violence and crime. According to this body of research, potential criminals assess the benefits and costs of committing crimes, compare them with those of legal activities and choose accordingly. In other words, widespread impunity makes the expected costs of committing crimes very low.

For example, fewer than 10 percent of homicides in the region are resolved; and the justice system is very inefficient with about 60 percent of the prison population in pre-trial detention on average.

These are regional statistics, but in this country we are painfully aware of the extremely low detection and conviction rates.

The slow pace of justice increases criminals’ sense of impunity. For that matter, the longer questions about the integrity of the process of judicial appointments remains unresolved the more the public’s confidence in the justice system is shaken. The choice that some make to engage in criminality rather than a life of struggle within the rule of law becomes even easier to justify to themselves.

There is a correlation between poverty and criminality no doubt, but armed violence should not be lightly explained away by the impending financial hardships nor should it be treated as a side issue to economic recovery.

The Geneva Declaration on Armed Violence and Development establishes the impact that this kind of criminality has on socio- economic growth: Armed violence destroys lives and livelihoods, breeds insecurity, fear and terror, and has a profoundly negative impact on human development.

It imposes enormous costs on the State, communities and individuals.

Armed violence closes schools, empties markets, burdens health services, destroys families, weakens the rule of law, and prevents social services from reaching people in need. Armed violence kills — directly and indirectly. It threatens permanently the respect of human rights.

Living free from the threat of armed violence is a basic human need. It is a precondition for human development, dignity and well-being. Providing for the human security of their citizens is a core responsibility of governments.

IDB economist Dr Jeetendra Khadan, speaking at a Trinidad and Tobago Chamber of Industry and Commerce event earlier this week, clearly pointed out that the role of the Government in the context of the present economic realities will have to change. In fact, tackling criminality and armed v i o l e n c e must be a central gove r n m e n t r e sp ons i - bility in the process of e c onom i c recovery.