The United National Congress (UNC) made a campaign promise to slash crime by 50 per cent within five years. That means cutting the murder rate from roughly 600 yearly to around 300 by the next general election in 2030.
It is an ambitious numerical goal that the party based on a strategy of legislative reform, policing modernisation, judicial overhaul, victim support and community rooted prevention.
Critics might consider that to be an unrealistic goal given past performance and resource constraints. Some might argue that achieving such targets requires decades of sustained investment to realise incremental gains.
However, this is a nation that has been struggling to overcome its crime crisis for the better part of two decades. With the murder count rapidly climbing towards 200, there is a great deal of interest in how the new UNC administration, now two months into its tenure, will translate its manifesto promises into measurable results.
Based on its election pledges, the Kamla Persad-Bissessar administration is pursuing a hybrid model of hard enforcement that includes tech-enabled policing and tougher laws, combined with the soft prevention approach of enhanced victim support and a range of social programmes in high-crime communities.
These initiatives will depend heavily on sustained funding and cross-agency coordination. They are modelled on interventions that have been successful in other jurisdictions but will require legislative change and public-private partnerships to succeed here.
Among the numerical goals set by the Government is the delivery of swift, transparent justice with indictable cases heard and resolved end-to-end in two to three years and slashing the huge court backlog.
In addition, professional upgrades in the T&T Police Service (TTPS) and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) are being touted as ways to produce sharp improvements in abysmal crime detection rates, currently under ten per cent, as well as conviction rates of less than five per cent that are well below regional benchmarks.
The best known and most fiercely debated aspect of the Government’s anti-crime plan is the introduction of stand-your-ground laws to give citizens expanded firearms rights.
But there is much more to the UNC’s crime-fighting plans, including the construction of a national forensic science complex, digitising every police station and erecting new courts.
Many of these proposals are capital-intensive, requiring hundreds of millions in expenditure, and there are questions about the TTPS’ ability to recruit and retain enough trained officers to staff new units, particularly if salaries and working conditions aren’t improved.
The UNC’s proposals are heavy on tough, tech-driven law enforcement and make only passing references to poverty, joblessness and homelessness, important elements in crime prevention which will require sizable investments in housing, mental healthcare and youth employment.
Thorny problems like gang recruitment and domestic violence will also require priority focus entailing significant levels of manpower and funding.
Five years is not a lot of time to turn around high levels of violent crime in a country with a murder rate that is among the highest in the Caribbean and the world on a per capita basis.
Impressive-sounding manifesto promises might produce some short-term success, but gains can only be sustained if crime-fighting initiatives are accompanied by measures to build up social infrastructure, preserve civil liberties and secure sustainable financing.
Crime-fighting is not a numbers game. For real results, enforcement needs to be balanced with community-led, public-health interventions and deep institutional reform.