Barbadians’ trust in law enforcement and the justice system faces further strain with the introduction of new amendments that could compel ordinary citizens to assist police officers in crime-fighting activities, a behavioural scientist says.
Under the Police (Amendment) Act, 2025, anyone who refuses to aid a police officer when required can face a fine of up to $10 000 or one year in prison, or both. Attorney General Dale Marshall has insisted that the amendment does not introduce that provision, only increases the fines for the offence, which is in the law that dates back more than 60 years.
Professor Dwayne Devonish, a specialist in management and organisational behaviour, acknowledged the logic behind the legislation, noting that community involvement is essential to tackling crime and that policing resources are limited. However, he warned that coercion could backfire.
“Barbadians’ trust in law enforcement is already fragile… forcing ordinary people into situations of confrontation risks eroding confidence further. When citizens feel coerced rather than protected, it will create resentment rather than cooperation,” he said.
Under the controversial legislation, soldiers deployed jointly with the Police Service are granted the same powers of arrest, privileges, and immunities as police officers for the period of deployment.
Devonish flagged concerns about blurred lines of accountability when military personnel operate alongside police, questioning who bears responsibility if civilians are harmed or excessive force is used.
He stressed that participation must remain voluntary, supported by clear protections and trust-building initiatives.
“I think public participation in the crime fight or crime prevention is important, but it should always be built on trust and voluntary partnership. Citizens need also to be clear about the assurances of their rights and protections and limits of responsibility…. A constructive path might be one that expands voluntary community policing initiatives rather than mandating citizens to participate directly,” he added.
Devonish’s caution comes amid deep public scepticism. The Fear of Crime in Barbados report, presented by the Criminal Justice Research and Planning Unit in July, found that only 6.7 per cent of respondents believed the justice system effectively deters crime. Allegations that police are “in bed with criminals” have amplified fears of reprisals and betrayal, with 80 per cent citing community narratives as sources of fear.
These anxieties were underscored recently by a claimed revenge attack in a rural parish, allegedly linked to prior testimony. Devonish said that while such incidents may not reflect a widespread pattern, their visibility in the media sends a “shockwave” through communities.
“It will obviously further erode trust in the anonymity of reporting crime. You will find fewer people being less inclined to report crime,” he said.
Even statutory protections such as the Witness Protection Act, he noted, may not fully reassure citizens in close-knit communities. He called for structured public education campaigns to explain legal safeguards and the limits of citizen responsibility.
“All these amendments are going to be quite frightening. They need to be accompanied by a proper public education campaign, public consultation and input to highlight the importance of the changes and how risks will be addressed.”
Devonish also pointed to systemic inefficiencies that undermine public confidence, including delays in adjudication, the relationships between the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions and police, and challenges in securing witnesses and juries. He urged a comprehensive assessment of the justice system to identify the “true barriers to pace”.
On the issue of witness protection, he explained that while technologies such as voice masking or “cloning” are used to conceal identities, public perception remains a hurdle. Some fear that such tools could be reverse-engineered or that contextual clues might still expose them.
“People will still feel concerned that there are people out there who may have a technology that can unmask…. The burden of responsibility is on the justice system to ensure that people are properly educated about this particular practice and that they are assured that whatever technology they use – masking and anonymity – is upheld in practice,” he said.
Even with technological safeguards, Devonish noted, the perception of vulnerability remains high, especially in tight-knit communities. He stressed that public confidence hinges not just on the tools used, but on clear messaging. The justice system, he said, must reinforce that anonymity is designed to protect lives, not obscure truth.
Devonish described the psychological toll of fear on reporting, referring to it as “sublime anxiety”, a natural but potent deterrent. He noted that even isolated cases of exposure can ripple through communities and discourage cooperation.
He also addressed a common misconception: that anonymous testimony undermines fairness. While some argue that defendants should know who is testifying against them, Devonish countered that anonymity is not about secrecy, but about safeguarding lives.
“We gotta recognise the work of the justice system: witness anonymity is not about secrecy; it’s about safety. That’s the key point.”
sheriabrathwaite@barbadostoday.bb
The post Expert warns police amendment may backfire amid fragile public trust appeared first on Barbados Today.
