Home Letters Division, distrust and fear now pervade Guyana Police Force
Dear Editor,
A report in another section of the media (Sept. 17, 2017) screamed, “Seelall must go: Sanction Ramnarine”. Why? Because, according to the report, Commissioner of Police, Seelall Persaud, “had improperly inserted himself into the investigation into the alleged plot although he was on leave.”
Assistant Commissioner David Ramnarine, on the other hand, reportedly “failed to ensure proper probe while acting as top cop.”
Paul Slowe, a former Assistant Commissioner of Police with a seeming grouse against the Guyana Police Force, its top leadership, and the former Government, has pelted the mega stone. He came out with vengeance, venom, and unreserved bias, which were obvious from day one of the CoI. He is long suspected to be an active behind-the-scenes advisor to the PNC, and the perfect hatchet man to ensure preconceived political objectives are achieved.
On what limb does the accusation against Commissioner Persaud stands? Is it a fact that he was on leave? The answer is yes. Is it a fact that he became involved in the matter? Again the answer is yes. Then did he obstruct justice, improperly insert himself into the investigation, or in any way compromise the investigation? The answer is that he could not have. Why? Because the power and authority at all material times remain vested in him, even though he was on leave!
Let’s consult Article 211 (c) of the Constitution. It states, “If the office of the Commissioner of Police is vacant, or the holder thereof is unable to perform the functions of his or her office, a person may be appointed to act in that office…” A legal luminary forcefully concluded that none of the above applied to the office of the Commissioner of Police or the person of the Commissioner of Police, therefore a Deputy Commissioner could not have been appointed to act in that office. Neither was the office of the Commissioner of Police vacant, nor was the Commissioner disabled from performing the functions of Commissioner. Authority, therefore, still resides in the Commissioner of Police.
Further, Article 228 (2) of the Constitution continues to provide guidance and clarity. “Where by this Constitution a power is conferred upon any person or authority to make any appointment to any public office, a person may be appointed to that office notwithstanding some other person may be holding that office when that person is on leave of absence pending the relinquishment of that office; and where two or more persons are holding the same office by reason of an appointment made under this paragraph, then for the purpose of function conferred upon the holder of that office, the last person appointed shall be deemed to be the sole holder thereof.” What is the main element here? Leave of absence pending the relinquishment of the office of the Commissioner!
Legal luminary again asserts that Commissioner of Police Persaud was not on leave of absence pending the relinquishment of the office of Commissioner! He remains the last and only holder of that office, even though he was on leave.
Assistant Commissioner Ramnarine could not have been appointed under Article 228 (2) to the office of Commissioner of Police. Therefore, he was never Commissioner of Police while Commissioner of Police Seelall Persaud was on leave. As such, the power and authority of Commissioner remained vested in Seelall Persaud at all material times. It follows therefore that notwithstanding Commissioner of Police Seelall Persaud was on leave, he had at all material times the administrative power and authority to act in accordance with the powers vested in him.
Therefore, he could not have improperly inserted himself into any investigation, as reported by the State newspaper. One would dare say it was his duty to ensure justice is done following the rule of law.
Assistant Commissioner Ramnarine, though a good administrator, cast his bet on the wrong side of the coalition. Maybe he’ll repose in the knowledge that at the TSU Square, all dressed in AFC colours, he championed the cause of change, and then regaled in victory at the same square with the words, “Is a-we time now.” Like his political friends, he is now learning that the PNC plays hard ball in diabolical ways. He is now caught in the middle, a victim of the power struggle between the dominant PNC and the subservient AFC. Wherever his career takes him will be dependent on the outcome of the power struggle within the PNC+AFC.
The plot unfolds in a surreal spectacle, deja vu, a replay of history. “After the 1968 election, Burnham began to purge Indo-Guyanese from the GDF officer corps. By 1970, Afro-Guyanese dominated both the officer and the enlisted ranks of the GDF. The ruling PNC began using political and ethnic criteria in selecting officer cadets… attempted both to consolidate and expand the loyalty of the GDF by manipulating racial symbols and by materially rewarding loyal soldiers … 1973 an aide to Forbes Burnham openly advocated that the GDF pledge its allegiance to the PNC…This recommendation was made policy the following year. Although the recommendation was unpopular among career officers, disagreement was not voiced openly for fear…” (Guyana and Belize Country Studies: Federal Research Division (Library of Congress) Edited by Tim Merrill. Jan. 1992). Obsessed with control, the aide to Burnham truly walks in the footsteps of his deceased master.
Albeit, it is now the Guyana Police Force in which he plays out his role as President and Commander-in-Chief, with Paul Slowe as his surrogate advisor/hatchet man. The resultant effect, however, is unparalleled damage to the Guyana Police Force. Division, distrust and fear now pervade among the officer corps. Esprit de corps has been savaged, sacrificed on the altar of executive lawlessness in the guise of a Commission of Inquiry, the outcome of which would appear to have already been determined.
Romesh V. Singhrai