Mark Shields | Bomb threats and public safety: Call for intelligence-led response

On Friday, August 29 in New Kingston, hundreds of workers were evacuated from offices and shops following a bomb threat. For over two hours, they stood exposed in the sun — confused, frustrated, and vulnerable. While public safety must always be the top priority, we must ask whether the response was proportionate, effective, and grounded in reality.

Having spent years investigating international terrorism at Scotland Yard, and later overseeing crime and strategic operations in Jamaica, I’ve seen firsthand how bomb threats are weaponised—not with explosives, but with disruption. And in Jamaica, where the threat of terrorism remains extremely low, we must stop treating every anonymous message as if it were a credible attack.

REALITY OF BOMB THREATS IN JAMAICA

The vast majority of bomb threats in Jamaica are hoaxes. They’re designed to incite panic, interrupt business, and test the readiness of security forces. When we evacuate entire buildings before assessing the credibility of a threat, we inadvertently reward the hoaxer. We hand them exactly what they want: disruption and attention.

Friday’s incident reportedly stemmed from an emailed threat—unspecific, uncorroborated, and lacking any ties to known extremist groups. Yet, the response was immediate and sweeping. While well-intentioned, such a reaction can do more harm than good. It disrupts commerce, undermines public confidence, and can expose people to even greater risk. Worse still, when a real threat does emerge, the public may become desensitised and less likely to respond with urgency.

This isn’t theoretical—it has happened before. In October 2018, the Manchester Parish Court in Mandeville was evacuated due to a bomb threat. After a comprehensive emergency response, it was revealed to be a hoax. The culprit, a 24-year-old man named Collin Daley, had made the call to avoid appearing at his own court hearing. He was arrested, charged, and later convicted for creating public mischief and disseminating false information. This was not an act of terrorism—it was a selfish disruption. Yet, it led to unnecessary panic, wasted resources, and halted the operations of the court system.

The lesson is clear: we must differentiate between credible threats and baseless mischief. Knee-jerk evacuations only empower those who seek to exploit the system.

ECONOMIC COST OF OVERREACTION

Beyond the inconvenience, Friday’s disruption carried a significant financial cost. New Kingston is Jamaica’s commercial heartbeat, home to an estimated 25,000–30,000 workers. A two-hour shutdown—factoring in lost productivity, halted transactions, and the deployment of emergency resources—likely cost the economy between $210 million and $250 million (approximately US$1.3–1.6 million).

This is not just a security concern—it’s an economic one. Overreacting to hoaxes with full-scale evacuations drains national resources and undermines operational continuity.

DIVERSIONARY TACTICS

Bomb threats are also used strategically to divert police resources from real crimes. While officers respond to false alarms, criminal activity—such as robberies, break-ins, or targeted violence—can unfold elsewhere with minimal resistance. This tactic is common in international criminal networks and must be factored into Jamaica’s response strategy.

COMMUNITY INTELLIGENCE

Effective threat management hinges on strong community relationships. Intelligence from residents, business owners, and frontline workers often provides the earliest warning of radicalised individuals—especially those who self-radicalise outside traditional networks. Building trust with communities is as vital as investing in surveillance. Detection and deterrence start with cooperation, not just cameras.

TECHNOLOGY MUST EVOLVE

JamaicaEye is a valuable asset, but it needs expansion and modernisation. We should invest in AI-enabled cameras capable of facial recognition and behavioural analysis. Ethically deployed and well-governed, these technologies can track suspicious movements, identify known offenders, and support real-time threat assessment. Passive CCTV is no longer sufficient.

WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN INSTEAD?

Security forces must act swiftly—but also smartly. That starts with a rapid threat assessment before initiating mass evacuations. Key questions must be asked:

• Is the threat specific?

• Is there corroborating intelligence?

• Has a suspicious device or package been identified?

If not, the response should be measured and controlled. Evacuations should only occur when there is credible evidence of danger. In other cases, internal lockdowns, targeted sweeps, and coordination with bomb disposal units are more effective and far less disruptive.

As Professor Rohan Gunaratna, a leading global expert on counter-terrorism, notes: “Overreaction to hoaxes not only wastes resources but weakens long-term preparedness. A smarter, intelligence-driven approach ensures that when a real threat arises, the response is sharp, credible, and effective.”

This is not just theory. A 2021 Global Initiative Against Transnational Organised Crime report found that over 90 per cent of bomb threats in the Caribbean over the past decade were hoaxes, with fewer than one per cent having any link to terrorism or organised extremist groups. This data further underscores the urgent need for a new, intelligence-led threat response protocol in Jamaica—one that prioritises proportionality and focuses on real risks.

BALANCING SAFETY WITH SANITY

To be clear: I am not suggesting that we ignore threats. But our responses must be proportionate. The goal of a hoax is to create disruption. By evacuating thousands without justification, we do the hoaxer’s work for them.

Jamaica needs a bomb threat protocol that reflects its actual risk environment. We must shift from reflexive panic to intelligence-led decision-making—protecting lives without unnecessarily disrupting them.

It’s time to modernise our security posture. This begins with updated training, clear protocols, and leadership that understands the difference between credible threats and anonymous mischief. We must stop allowing hoaxes to dictate national movement. Let’s remain vigilant—but also wise.

The Ministry of National Security and the Jamaica Constabulary Force must urgently revise existing bomb threat protocols to reflect the country’s current threat level. Let’s protect lives—and livelihoods—through intelligence, not instinct.

Mark Shields is former deputy commissioner of police, Jamaica Constabulary Force and managing director of Shields Crime & Security Ltd. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com