A CASE Study of The Jamaican Government's Use of Political Psychiatry and Law to Silence Rastafari
- Empress Zaria
- Oct 27
- 16 min read
Addendum — Evidence of Collusion, Protective Protocols, and Accountability Measures
New evidence indicates coordinated action by the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Jamaica and subordinate legal officials to prevent the statutorily mandated referral of Mr. Lancelott Watson’s notarized Disabilities Act complaint to the Disabilities Rights Tribunal. Following that administrative dismissal, Mr. Watson was referred for psychiatric treatment under a diagnosis that, on available evidence, appears politically motivated and was used to curtail his access to legal redress.
These acts constitute prima facie collusion to obstruct judicial process, to inflict discriminatory treatment based on disability and religion, and to deny an elderly citizen an effective remedy. EMHRI hereby calls for immediate criminal, disciplinary, and international investigation into these acts; interim protective measures for Mr. Watson; and statutory reforms (see Protocols section) to prevent recurrence.
A. Updated factual findings (summary of collusion)
This section supplements the White Paper with specific, documented acts that demonstrate collusion among court officers, legal staff, and administrative officials in order to shield a principal State actor (the Registrar of the Supreme Court) from scrutiny and to deny Mr. Lancelott Watson his lawful remedies.
Recent material facts (to be incorporated in filings):
Change of Public Defender — The Office of the Public Defender’s incumbent changed during the pendency of Mr. Watson’s complaint. This change is material because the Public Defender’s Office was named as a respondent in the Notarised Section 16 Disabilities Act complaint, creating a conflict and obstructing the ordinary referral pathway under Section 16(3). (Record the official notice of change and date.)
Instruction and Extra-Judicial Determination by Registrar — The Registrar of the Supreme Court, Nicole Walters-Wellington, is alleged to have instructed subordinate officials to prevent Mr. Watson’s notarized Section 16(2)/(35) complaint from being lawfully referred to the Disabilities Rights Tribunal as required by statute. This instruction appears to have been implemented through Legal Officer Travis Ebanks.
Procedural Evasion by Legal Officer — Legal Officer Travis Ebanks, acting allegedly at the direction of the Registrar, issued a “Determination” dated 26 September 2025 which dismissed the notarized complaint without following the statutorily mandated referral and adjudicative process. The Determination was issued by a Legal Officer, not the Disabilities Rights Tribunal — a procedural irregularity that usurped the Tribunal’s exclusive referral jurisdiction under the Disabilities Act.
Denial of Access to the Tribunal — The combined actions of the Registrar and Legal Officer effectively prevented the Disabilities Rights Tribunal from exercising its statutory mandate and denied Mr. Watson an independent hearing — thereby defeating the right to an effective remedy (ICCPR Art. 2(3)).
Medicalization as Retaliation — Shortly after the administrative dismissal, Mr. Watson was subject to referral for psychiatric treatment on the basis of a diagnosis that appears to have been fabricated or politically motivated. The diagnosis is alleged to have been created or encouraged by State officials to justify limiting Mr. Watson’s agency and access to legal process. Mr. Watson currently remains under outpatient care at Bellevue Hospital pursuant to that diagnosis.
Pattern and Intent — Taken together, these acts display the elements of an orchestrated effort to: (a) nullify statutory referral mechanisms; (b) substitute administrative determinations for judicial or tribunal processes; and (c) convert a political/administrative dispute into a medical problem to silence the complainant.
Legal implications: The conduct described above constitutes prima facie evidence of obstruction of justice, maladministration of public office, abuse of power, and possible criminal misconduct (including perjury, false administration, and conspiracy to deprive a citizen of rights). It also engages Jamaica’s obligations under ICCPR, CRPD, CAT, and the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms.
B. Chronology & Evidence
C. Suggested Built-In Protocols to Prevent Collusion (model rules to propose to Parliament, Tribunal, or OHCHR recommendations)
Mandatory Referral Mechanism (Statutory Lockbox)
Amend the Disabilities Act (or issue Tribunal regulations) to create a non-discretionary automatic referral procedure: once a notarized complaint is validly filed, the Council has 7 calendar days to effectuate a referral to the Tribunal; failure to do so triggers an immediate notice to the Office of the Public Protector/Ombudsman and to OHCHR. No private administrative determination may substitute for Tribunal jurisdiction.
Conflict-of-Interest Disclosure & Recusal Registry
Require all judicial and administrative officers to file a public conflict-of-interest disclosure when a party or office named in a complaint involves colleagues, superiors, or prior clients. Any named officer must recuse; failure to recuse triggers an immediate external review.
Prohibition on Administrative Adjudication by Subordinates
Codify that only the Disabilities Rights Tribunal (or a duly constituted judicial body) may determine the admissibility or merits of a Section 16 complaint. Administrative staff may not issue dispositive determinations; any such act is null and void.
Independent Case Tracking and Audit Trail
Create an online, timestamped case tracking portal (public read-only access) for all disability complaints and tribunal referrals, with audit logs that show who opened, edited, or closed a file. Audit logs are prima facie evidence in inquiries.
Immediate Protective Remedies for Complainants
Where a complainant is vulnerable (elderly, disabled), a protective interim measure may be ordered within 72 hours by an independent duty judge or international observer to prevent removal to psychiatric care without independent medical authorization.
Third-Party Oversight Mandate
For complaints involving high-level public officers (Registrar, Judges, Permanent Secretaries), a third-party oversight mechanism (e.g., panel of retired judges from another Commonwealth jurisdiction, or an OHCHR observer) must be automatically engaged.
Whistleblower & Witness Protection
Strengthen legal protections for court staff, lawyers, and clinicians who report interference or instructions from superiors. Include confidential reporting channels (to Ombudsman/OHCHR) and anti-retaliation sanctions.
Transparent Sanctions & Discipline
Specify disciplinary measures (see section D) for malfeasance, and create a public register of sanctions for accountability.
Section D:
Accountability and Consequences for Breach of Public Trust
1. Legal and Criminal Consequences
Violations of public trust by government officials—especially those that obstruct justice, falsify records, or conspire to deny citizens access to legal remedy—constitute serious criminal offenses under both Jamaican and international law.
These actions represent crimes against public integrity and human rights, and must attract the highest available penalties.
Recommended statutory penalties and enforcement mechanisms:
Imprisonment: Minimum 10 years to life imprisonment for any public official (including Registrars, Legal Officers, or Judges) found guilty of:
Conspiracy to pervert the course of justice;
Abuse of authority to deny a citizen access to due process;
Using psychiatric or medical institutions as tools of repression; or
Colluding with others to falsify or obstruct official proceedings.
Fines:
Fines not less than USD $250,000 (JMD $38,000,000) or three times the economic damage inflicted, whichever is greater, payable personally by each culpable officer (not by the State).
Forfeiture of Benefits:
Immediate termination from public office, loss of pension rights, and permanent disqualification from holding any future government or judicial post.
Public Accountability Register:
Every judgment or disciplinary action against a state officer for corruption or obstruction of justice must be published in a publicly accessible National Integrity Register, maintained by the Ombudsman and audited annually by an Independent Citizens Oversight Board.
2. Oversight Reform:
Secondary Access to Justice Mechanism (Lancelott Clause)
The case of Mr. Lancelott Watson exposes a structural flaw: citizens cannot directly access the Disabilities Rights Tribunal without the Jamaica Council for Persons with Disabilities acting as intermediary. This dependency enables collusion, manipulation, and denial of service. To close that loophole, EMHRI recommends creation of the Lancelott Clause — a built-in safeguard guaranteeing direct, unmediated access to justice.
Key provisions:
Direct Access Channel: Any citizen filing a notarized complaint under the Disabilities Act may bypass the Council entirely and file directly to the Disabilities Rights Tribunal Secretariat via registered mail, secure online portal, or authorized Human Rights Institute (such as EMHRI).
Independent Referral Oversight: Every referral (or refusal) by the Jamaica Council for Persons with Disabilities must be automatically copied to the Office of the Ombudsman and OHCHR Caribbean Regional Office within 5 days. Failure to do so triggers a mandatory investigation.
External Complaint Escalation Pathway:If a citizen’s complaint is not acknowledged or referred within 14 days, it must automatically escalate to an Independent Appeals Unit composed of a High Court judge (retired), a civil society representative, and an international human rights observer.
Criminal Liability for Obstruction: Any public servant who delays, alters, or conceals a referral faces automatic suspension, forensic audit of communications, and criminal prosecution for Obstruction of a Tribunal Process.
Mandatory Data Transparency: All complaints and their referral statuses must appear on a public-facing case-tracking portal, updated weekly. Tampering with this system constitutes Tampering with Evidence, punishable by up to 15 years imprisonment.
3. Expanded Sanctions by Office and Category
A. Law Enforcement & Court Administrators
Automatic criminal indictment for abuse of office, obstruction of justice, or conspiracy.
Mandatory imprisonment (minimum 10 years) for willful obstruction of a tribunal case or falsification of records.
Civil restitution orders requiring personal payment of damages to victims.
Asset seizure of any financial gain or benefit derived from misconduct.
B. Attorneys and Legal Officers
Disbarment for participation in unlawful dismissal of cases or in collusion with state officers.
Immediate arrest and charge for knowingly submitting false legal documents or determinations.
Restitution and public apology mandated by the General Legal Council, with disciplinary reports made public.
C. Judges and Senior Court Officials
Judicial Service Commission inquiry within 30 days of any complaint.
Impeachment or removal from office for proven bias, corruption, or complicity in obstruction.
Referral to international observers (IACHR/OHCHR) if the domestic body fails to act.
D. Medical Practitioners & Psychiatric Institutions
Independent forensic review of all political psychiatric referrals.
Revocation of licenses and criminal prosecution for false certification or coercive treatment without medical necessity.
Institutional penalty: up to USD $1 million fine and potential closure for systemic political misuse.
E. Oversight Bodies and Permanent Secretaries
Ministerial liability: Permanent Secretaries and Ministers who fail to correct misconduct after notification shall be jointly liable for damages and may face criminal negligence charges.
Ombudsman and Auditor oversight to ensure follow-through and enforce sanctions.
4. Governance Innovation: National Independent Oversight Authority (NIOA)
To eliminate internal collusion, establish the National Independent Oversight Authority, composed of:
Representatives of civil society, human rights organizations, and Rastafari/Indigenous communities;
A retired judge and an international legal expert;
A representative from OHCHR or the Caribbean Court of Justice.
Mandate:
Monitor all tribunals, courts, and ministries for compliance with due process.
Initiate investigations sua sponte when patterns of abuse emerge.
Issue binding directives for suspension or disciplinary action.
Penalties for Noncompliance: Any official ignoring an NIOA directive faces summary removal and criminal contempt proceedings punishable by up to 5 years imprisonment and personal fines of USD $100,000.
Citizen Trigger Mechanism (CTM) — Guaranteed Access to Justice Clause
Automatic Activation: Any citizen or human rights body who files a notarized complaint to a public agency (e.g., Registrar, Public Defender, or Tribunal) must receive a written acknowledgment within 5 days and an initial action notice within 7 days. Failure to respond constitutes a constructive denial of justice and automatically triggers referral to the National Independent Oversight Authority (NIOA) and OHCHR Regional Desk.
Direct Route to Constitutional Jurisdiction: If the domestic courts or Registrar fail to act within 14 days, the citizen (or their legal representative) gains direct standing before the Constitutional Division of the Supreme Court or, if blocked, before the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) under its original jurisdiction for fundamental rights enforcement.
International Recognition of Trigger Rights: The White Paper grounds this mechanism in Articles 8, 9, and 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 2(3) of the ICCPR, and Article 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights — all of which guarantee the right to an effective domestic remedy. When the State obstructs such remedy, citizens acquire immediate standing before international courts.
Mandatory External Escalation: Upon 7-day non-response, the case file and timestamp must be forwarded to:
OHCHR (United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights)
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR)
African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights Liaison (Sixth Region Desk)
NIOA Enforcement Secretariat
Criminal Liability for Non-Response: Any official who fails to respond or act within 7 days faces summary suspension and criminal charges for obstruction of a constitutional remedy, punishable by 25 years to life imprisonment under the revised “Treason Against the People” clause.
“Where the Constitutional Court fails to function, the Citizen Trigger Mechanism ensures the immediate restoration of access to justice. Any refusal or delay by the Registrar, Judiciary, or relevant ministry constitutes constructive denial of a constitutional remedy, transferring jurisdiction to the National Independent Oversight Authority and to international human rights tribunals. The right of the People to justice cannot be administratively suspended to limit State liability.”
Section E — Bridging Mechanism for Access to Domestic and International Justice
1. The Role of the Empress Menen Human Rights Institute (EMHRI)
To guarantee that no Jamaican is denied protection because of illiteracy, poverty, disability, or fear of reprisal, the Empress Menen Human Rights Institute, operating in partnership with the Haile Selassie I JAH RasTafari Royal Ethiopian Judah Coptic Church, shall serve as:
A legally recognized intermediary between citizens and all Jamaican tribunals, courts, and oversight bodies;
A registered national contact point for the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), and the Caribbean Court of Justice; and
A sanctuary and information center offering free assistance in drafting, translating, and transmitting petitions to both domestic and international human-rights mechanisms.
2. Government Funding With Institutional Independence
The Institute shall receive annual budgetary subvention from Parliament comparable to that of the Public Defender, but shall be structurally independent:
Funding to be administered through a protected “Human Rights Trust Fund,” audited yearly by the Auditor-General.
Neither the Cabinet nor any ministry may direct or suppress the Institute’s actions; its mandate is constitutionally protected under the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms and Jamaica’s treaty obligations.
Oversight of expenditure is performed by a mixed board consisting of representatives from civil society, the Rastafari and Indigenous communities, the disabled community, and international observers.
3. Access Pathway for Citizens (Literacy-Inclusive Process)
Intake: Any individual may approach EMHRI in person, by phone, WhatsApp, community office, or local church chapter.
Assistance: Trained officers assist in preparing affidavits, complaints, and digital filings; oral statements are recorded and transcribed.
Submission: Within five (5) days, EMHRI transmits the completed file simultaneously to:
the appropriate Jamaican authority or tribunal; and
the corresponding international mechanism (OHCHR, IACHR, African Court liaison).
Tracking & Feedback: Every submission receives a public tracking number; updates are sent to the complainant by phone or printed letter in plain language.
4. Integration With the Citizen Trigger Mechanism
When a citizen files through EMHRI and the State fails to respond within five (5) to seven (7) days, EMHRI is mandated to escalate the case to international bodies.
Such escalation carries the same legal effect as if the citizen had filed directly, ensuring recognition under ICCPR Art. 2(3) and American Convention Art. 25.
The Institute therefore functions as the operational arm of the Citizen Trigger Mechanism.
5. Legislative Recognition of the Church’s Observer Role
The Haile Selassie I JAH RasTafari Royal Ethiopian Judah Coptic Church shall be formally restored to its intended Observer Status in the Jamaican Legislature—a corrective measure acknowledging the State’s prior failure to enact the enabling bill. The Church’s observer mandate will include:
monitoring deliberations on human-rights and social-justice legislation;
advising Parliament on faith-based peace and reconciliation policy; and
nominating one representative to the EMHRI Oversight Board.
6. Why This Bridge Is Essential
When citizens cannot reach the courts, justice must reach the citizens. The Empress Menen Human Rights Institute will embody that principle—ensuring that every Jamaican, regardless of literacy or station, can obtain representation, protection, and remedy. Its independence preserves the separation between church and state while its public funding affirms the State’s constitutional duty to uphold human rights for all.
Section F — Sustainable Funding and Rapid Mobilization Framework for the Empress Menen Human Rights Institute (EMHRI)
1. Constitutional Basis for Funding
Under Section 13(1)(c) and Section 19 of Jamaica’s Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (2011 Amendment), the State bears an affirmative duty to “respect and uphold the rights and freedoms of all persons.”Because EMHRI performs this core constitutional function on behalf of the People, its funding must be treated as a constitutional obligation, not a discretionary grant.
“The Empress Menen Human Rights Institute shall receive constitutionally protected funding as an essential instrument for the fulfillment of the State’s duty to guarantee the protection and enforcement of human rights.”
2. Funding Sources (Multiple Streams to Prevent Capture)
A. National Human Rights Trust Fund (N-HRTF)
Created by Act of Parliament and held in escrow by the Bank of Jamaica.
Seeded with 1% of annual fines, forfeitures, and confiscations arising from corruption and public-misconduct cases.
Replenished annually through:
0.05% allocation from all national ministry budgets;
5% of every judicial award or settlement for state human-rights violations; and
Voluntary international contributions certified by the Auditor General.
B. Emergency Humanitarian Relief Window (EHRW)
A rapid-response fund under EMHRI, allowing immediate disbursement of up to JMD $50 million (≈USD $325,000) for emergency housing, legal representation, and psychological support for victims like Mr. Watson.
Refilled quarterly by contingency transfers from the Ministry of Finance under the Disaster and Emergency Relief provisions.
C. International Partnership Grants
EMHRI will maintain standing grant agreements with:
The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR),
UNDP Caribbean Human Rights Facility,
CARICOM Development Fund,
African Union Sixth Region Secretariat, and
Diaspora-based philanthropic partners (e.g., Francis Foundation, Rastafari cooperative networks).
All external funds are tax-exempt, held in trust, and publicly reported quarterly.
3. Human Resources and Legal Capacity (Immediate Deployment Plan)
A. Core Staffing (Initial 12–18 months)
B. Volunteer & Diaspora Support
Activate the Global HSIM Cooperative Network as a volunteer arm for data entry, translation, and case tracking.
Diaspora lawyers and academics may apply as Honorary Human Rights Advocates through the MetaVersity platform.
4. Seamless Access and Rapid Disbursement Protocols
Immediate Operationalization
Upon publication of the White Paper and endorsement by Cabinet, EMHRI receives an emergency interim subvention of JMD $100 million (≈USD $650,000) to operationalize intake and case review within 30 days.
Statutory Disbursement Mechanism
The Auditor General certifies EMHRI’s quarterly disbursement requests within 5 working days of submission.
Funds are automatically released through the Bank of Jamaica’s Human Rights Escrow Account, bypassing political bottlenecks.
Digital Transparency
All financial transactions, salaries, and grants are logged on a public blockchain-based ledger (through MetaVersity’s online transparency module).
Quarterly public reports are published in plain language and patois translation.
Legal Representation Pool
EMHRI retains a roster of certified Human Rights Defense Attorneys paid per case.
Attorneys receive retainer fees directly from the Trust Fund to prevent delay.
5. Oversight and Anti-Corruption Safeguards (Closing Funding Loopholes)
6. Legislative Clause for Inclusion
“Funding for the Empress Menen Human Rights Institute shall be continuous, independent, and beyond political discretion. Any official or agency delaying or obstructing the release of approved funds shall be deemed to have obstructed justice and shall face criminal penalties of imprisonment for not less than twenty-five (25) years.”
Section G — Mandatory Minimum Monetary Remedy for Human Rights Violations
1. Principle of Automatic Reparative Justice
Every violation of a citizen’s fundamental human rights — whether through action or omission by a public servant, law-enforcement officer, judge, or medical professional — constitutes an actionable injury to both the individual and the Jamaican State’s moral integrity.
To ensure justice is not symbolic but tangible, the Empress Menen Human Rights Institute (EMHRI) shall oversee a Mandatory Minimum Remedy clause, enforced through both domestic and international mechanisms.
2. Mandatory Minimum Award
Each proven violation of human rights shall attract no less thanUSD $500,000 (JMD ≈ $76,000,000)per violation per victim, payable within 90 days of judgment or acknowledgment of breach.
Additional provisions:
For violations involving torture, psychiatric abuse, or unlawful imprisonment, damages may be doubled.
In cases involving minors, elders, or persons with disabilities, damages may be tripled.
Failure to remit damages within the prescribed period triggers automatic enforcement through asset seizure under the direction of EMHRI and the National Independent Oversight Authority (NIOA).
3. Sources of Payment
Payments shall be drawn from the National Human Rights Trust Fund (N-HRTF), replenished by:
5% of all national fines and confiscations from corruption or misconduct cases; and
Direct budgetary subventions guaranteed under Section F.
Where an individual public officer is proven to have acted with malice, intent, or gross negligence, the State may recover the full amount from that officer personally, through salary garnishment, pension forfeiture, or property lien.
4. Enforcement and International Backstop
EMHRI shall transmit all unpaid awards to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the OHCHR Caribbean Desk for enforcement under Jamaica’s treaty obligations.
Any attempt by a State body to obstruct payment constitutes continuing violation, incurring an additional USD $250,000 fine per 30-day period of delay.
“The State’s obligation to compensate victims of human rights violations shall be automatic and unconditional. The minimum award shall not be less than Five Hundred Thousand United States Dollars (USD $500,000) per violation per person. Non-payment or delay in payment constitutes a further breach of human rights and shall expose the responsible ministry and officer to criminal penalties under the Treason Against the People clause.”
References
The current case-law foundations consist of the convictions and treatment of Marcus Mosiah Garvey and Leonard Percival Howell, both of which exhibit patterns of state misuse of law and psychiatry. (See research on Garvey’s trial and Howell’s suppression.) Alabama Law Scholarly Commons+2ScienceDirect+2
Further investigation may uncover additional cases, and therefore call for an ongoing case-database to be maintained by the EMHRI.
Strengthen the Legal Framework
Garvey’s conviction was politically motivated and is discussed in “Jailing a Rainbow: The Marcus Garvey Case”.) SSRN+1
For Howell, the suppression of Howell is part of a systemic campaign. ScienceDirect
These historical cases provide precedential and moral foundation for the new institutional reforms proposed.
Implementation Pathway
Add a Section H: Implementation Roadmap & Monitoring — with timelines, pilot phases, responsible agencies, indicators of success, risk mitigation.
Include a data-collection clause requiring EMHRI to publish annual “State of Justice Report” with metrics (tribunal referrals, case backlog, citizen trigger activations, awards paid etc).
Ensure International Review Readiness
Add an Annex: Research Agenda which invites international scholars and human-rights bodies to collaborate in expanding the case-database beyond Garvey and Howell.
This White Paper demonstrates:
Historical Continuity of Injustice The linking of the cases of Marcus Mosiah Garvey, Leonard Percival Howell and Lancelott Watson reveals a persistent institutional design in which law, psychiatry and administrative power are used to silence dissent and marginalise identity. This is not mainstream today — but beneath the surface. Recognizing it is the first step toward remedy.
Normative Innovation The proposals — including the “Citizen Trigger Mechanism,” the direct-access Lancelott Clause, and the legally binding minimum remedies and penalties — transform theoretical human rights standards into actionable instruments. It shifts the focus from mere documentation to enforceable remedy.
Feasibility within International and Domestic Frameworks While the demands are bold — prison terms of 25 years to life for breach of public trust, minimum USD $500,000 compensation per violation, independent funding, and bridge institutions — they are grounded in legal precedent, treaty obligations (ICCPR, CRPD, CAT), and the inherent right of citizens to an effective remedy. By framing these within Jamaica’s Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms, the author empowers us with both moral and juridical authority.
Author’s Note
This case study is offered as both legal testimony and ancestral remembrance. The persecution of Garvey, Howell, and Watson reveals not isolated acts, but a systemic attempt to silence divine consciousness within the Black nation.
Justice for them is justice for us all.
May this document serve to awaken conscience, reform institutions, and inspire reparation across generations. In the name of His Imperial Majesty Haile Selassie I and Her Imperial Majesty Empress Menen Asfaw, may divine order be restored …
— Karen Alyssa Francis (Empress Zaria)
Priestess & Secretary, Haile Selassie I JAH RasTafari Royal Ethiopian Judah Coptic Church
Director, Empress Menen Human Rights Institute
Comments