The Disaster Risk Management Act (DRMA) may be a near-distant memory for the country, but human rights lobby, Jamaicans for Justice (JFJ), wants the five Government ministers and one Opposition Member of Parliament pictured at Shenseea’s album launch party earlier this week to answer to breaches of the newly scrapped laws. 

JFJ, in a statement on Friday (March 18), ripped Prime Minister Andrew Holness for suggesting ministers Floyd Green, Nigel Clarke, Christopher Tufton, Alando Terrelonge and Horace Chang were “star-struck” by the ALPHA songstress.

“Despite the Prime Minister lifting the DRMA measures in his speech at the budget debate on March 17, the organisation remains resolute that the officials should be formally charged,” the organisation said.

“We also note with dismay the stance of the prime minister who rather than strongly condemning the actions of the officials, instead chose to deflect, making light of the matter, calling the ministers involved “star-struck”. Such a stance by the prime minister is suggestive of the wanton disregard of the observance of the DRMA,” JFJ’s press release read.

Holness, in his much-anticipated contribution to the 2022-23 Budget Debate in Parliament yesterday, also announced that Culture Minister Olivia Grange would be personally collecting ‘sanctions’ from the Government ministers pictured flouting the DRMA. 

Grange, who was also at the event, kept her face mask firmly in place during all photo-ops with dancehall maven Shenseea. 

According to him, the J$100,000 fines would either go to a charity or towards the defence of a Jamaican citizen currently before the courts on similar DRMA breaches. 

Jamaican Twitter reactions:

As the DRMA was still in effect for the event, held at Romeich Entertainment headquarters on Campbell Boulevard in St Andrew, Jamaicans for Justice insisted that the rules still apply and thus charges must be laid against the officials, including South East St Ann MP Lisa Hanna.

“The display, which saw officials without masks and not adhering to social distancing protocols, is an insult to the Jamaican citizenry, many of who were charged under the DRMA, while public officials merely offer a ‘contribution’ of J$100,000 of self-imposed fines for their flagrant breach. JFJ is therefore calling for the officials to be charged by the courts in accordance [with] the DRMA Act, which had been in effect at the time,” argued Jamaicans for Justice.

The entity also posed the followed questions in relation to the event: 

• Was the event in question approved by the relevant authorities, with the relevant permits obtained?
• How many persons were approved to be in attendance and did the turnout exceed the limits under the DRMA which was in effect at the time?
• Has the Executive now adopted the functions of the court within the Judicial branch in imposing fines for those who disregard the law?

The Fagan Avenue-based JFJ was curious how the Government arrived at the $100,000 fines given that “ordinary Jamaicans had faced the risks of fines up to J$1million or one-year imprisonment.”

JFJ also called on the Holness administration to advise the Jamaican public, in the interest of justice, “whether the swift repeal of the order was to prevent the public officials from being charged.” 

Given the harsh realities of injustices in the country, JFJ continued, it lobbed another slew of queries at the government:

• How much money was collected by the courts from the previously imposed fines and whether the then restrictions and failure to use the amendments in relation to ticketing system was a mere revenue measure?
• What is the current status of the charges for persons who are before the courts who were charged before the orders were revoked?

The organisation further lambasted government officials for what it described as “a poor display of leadership and a slap in the face of many poor Jamaicans who have had to face harsh fines under the DRMA.”

“It is therefore imperative that an apology be extended by each public official seen in the video to the Jamaican people. JFJ further urges the government to always ensure equity in the application of the law,” JFJ contended.

“Anything less is an indication of the general sentiment of “ the two Jamaicas” and further contributes to the lack of trust in social and political institutions. To whom much is given, much is expected,” the entity added.