I consider myself extremely fortunate to have had a recent conversation with a young Jamaican, a university graduate in her mid-30s, on what the proposed Charter of Rights and Freedoms meant to persons of her age group. It was important for me to discover the perspective of persons who were, in essence, products of Independent Jamaica. I was keen to find out how they saw this foundation document which is meant to be both a resource tool and a statement of our constitutional entitlements.

My good fortune stemmed from the direction in which she took the conversation. She is engaged in the field of social work, mostly with persons younger than herself, so that there was little surprise for me that her views tended to be futuristic in nature, and I listened keenly.

First contribution

Her first contribution was that, throughout her formal education journey, her studies would have afforded her a meaningful glimpse of pre-Independence, our colonial history, and the history of Empire. She wanted me to understand that she appreciated that life in Independent Jamaica would have been considerably influenced by factors that are entrenched in our culture and our heritage, and that her own life experiences had served to drive home that simple truth.

The views that she had of her homeland, on several issues, have been conditioned, in large measure, by her having grown up in, and nurtured by, Independent Jamaica. She did not know any other Jamaica. Those matters included considerations relating to our constitutional arrangements, the attitude of our citizens to their responsibilities, the apparent settled grasp that we have on indiscipline in so many aspects of our daily existence, and the troubling nature of our interaction with each other.

She noted that the provisions of our present Constitution that the Charter will replace had not been exclusively developed by us here in Jamaica. According to her, persons of her generation were genuinely impressed by the fact that this Charter had been "fashioned by our own hands, with the use of our own brains and by our own industry".

That was the first lesson for her generation. They received inspiration from the fact that the ideas and the proposals in the Charter are the product of a faithful record of the views gathered from a wide cross section of our people over time, and she was satisfied that the development of this kind of document at this point required no less. It had to come from the people; they would not have been satisfied if it had been anything less than "the people's document".

Developmental approach

I was forced to ask her whether her generation would be reluctant to "own the Charter". Her reply was that we have to see this as the first constitutional declaration of intent that has been developed by our own people, that we should not be slow to acknowledge our strengths and to display confidence in our ability to build our own structures, including our structures of governance. That, according to her, was the developmental approach that had been adopted by several of her peers as to how they intended to live and to do business in Jamaica.

She was sure that, because of her vocation and deep concern with the wholesome development of our youth, the Charter had to be received as a resource tool; that it should be used to help to remove the chains of indiscipline that have only served to bind us to a continuous path of irresponsibility in almost all we say and do.

She agreed that, for our future development, a culture of responsibility had to take root; that such a culture had to be seen as one of the cornerstones of that development, and that it had to occupy an upfront chapter in VISION 2030. So, I asked how helpful could the Charter be in that process.

Mention, she said, had been made of the language in which the Charter was written and that it could have been more "people-friendly". That, however, was not what really occupied her thinking on the issues of discipline and responsibility as we move forward.

Her suggestion was that the books and the commentaries that they intended to write will offer an entirely different route to be taken. The teaching tools and the commentaries could not be a simple recital of the rights and freedoms; a far more useful purpose would be served if they spelt out what the protection of those rights should come to mean not only to the individual but also to the promotion of the moral health of the society.

She gave the example of the approach that her generation would wish to see taken concerning the right to life. That right, according to her, is usually considered and discussed within the context of "thou shalt not kill", as the Bible cautioned long ago, and then there was the statement of the punishment that would be meted out if that edict or commandment were to be disobeyed.

Emphasis

She was convinced that a commentary on the importance of this right would be far more effective in instilling discipline and a responsible attitude if there was a concentration on the significance of the preservation of life. From the kindergarten stage, the precious and irreplaceable nature of life in the development of a people was where the emphasis ought to be placed.

Her view was that society would be better served if the death penalty debate was anchored on respect for the precious nature of life and the stain that the taking of the life of a human being leaves on the psyche of a people; what the killing of a human being does to a family, to the community and to the entire society. In other words, they intended that the teaching and the commentaries should strike the link between respect for, and preservation of, life and the kind of Jamaica in which they wished to live and to do business.

The young thinker was upbeat about the inclusion of the right to vote and saw a direct connection to the right to hold political opinions. The teaching aids and the commentaries, she thought, should begin with the struggle of that band of men and women that included national hero, Norman Washington Manley, on the road to adult suffrage here in Jamaica. In that way, our citizens would be reminded and informed about what the vote really means to the construct of a democracy and living together as a tolerant society.

She admitted that the educational process to bring about such an understanding will take us on a long and winding road, for there was the need to reverse the view that to sell the vote is an exercise in being cute. The right to vote must be at the root of any programme for the funding of political parties and political campaigns; that a full appreciation of that right and the right to hold political opinions would, in time, remove the curse of victimisation; that this would signal the beginning of removing the sturdy, partisan barriers that they had unfortunately inherited.

Rights

She was also deeply conscious of the connection of the right of freedom of expression and the right to hold political opinions. If, in a responsible exercise of his right, a person expressed his opinion on a political matter which clearly affected the entire society, that person should not be singled out and identified by a political party leader to partisan adherents to be targeted "for special attention". If that was the dangerous practice of the generation before theirs, they did not wish it to be part of the Jamaica that they regarded as desirable. For them, to follow such a path was directly opposite to the spirit of the Charter and the direction in which it was meant to lead.

By far the most striking message that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms had for our young Jamaican was that much could be accomplished if there is the will to strive for and find consensus. For her, this was the first time that she could remember that a bill was being debated in Parliament which required cooperation between Government and Opposition for successful passage, and she had wondered how that steep hill was going to be climbed.

She recalled that the bill had been on the table of the House long before the change of government two years ago, and was pleased that the present Opposition has signalled that it had no intention of changing course, and that the required constitutional changes that have been so long in the making would receive its full attention. Policy views and projections should not be abandoned simply because a party comes to occupy a different side of the legislature. That had been witnessed far too often right here in Jamaica and within the wider CARICOM.

Her generation, she prophesied, would take to heart the real message that the Charter sends: that forward movement in our society cannot take place with that type of practice and manner of conducting the business of governance. They saw an entirely different road before them and had no intention of making those types of mistakes. VISION 2030 clearly required another approach.

A.J. Nicholson is Opposition spokesman on justice. Feedback may be sent to columns@gleanerjm.com.