More senior cops move to Court to challenge Police 2020 promotions

Four more Senior Police officers have moved to the High Court to challenge the promotion of several of their colleagues by the Police Service Commission (PSC).
Those challenging the promotions are Deputy Superintendent of Police Ravindra Stanley, Superintendent of Police Shivpersaud Bacchus, Assistant Superintendent of Police Shavon Jupiter, and Inspector of Police Prem Narine.
The PSC is headed by Assistant Commissioner of Police Paul Slowe. By Article 212 of the Constitution, the PSC has the power to make appointments to any office in the Guyana Police Force above the rank of Inspector, and theirs is the power to exercise disciplinary control over persons holding or acting in such offices.
These individual cases come weeks after Senior Superintendent of Police Calvin Brutus filed an application asking the court, among other things, to order the PSC to promote him to the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police. He claimed he was bypassed for promotion owing to a frivolous allegation of indiscipline against him.
He is also asking for an order of Certiorari quashing, nullifying and/or cancelling the decision of the PSC to promote three Senior Superintendents who, like him, have pending disciplinary matters, to the office of Assistant Commissioner of Police. He is also asking the court to overrule the PSC’s practice of not promoting officers with pending disciplinary matters.

Denied and rejected

Meanwhile, Deputy Superintendent Stanley is the officer in charge of one of the investigative units at the Special Organised Crime Unit (SOCU). In court documents seen by this publication, Stanley disclosed that on November 21, 2020, he was recommended for promotion to Superintendent of Police by the Senior Promotion Board of the Guyana Police Force.
According to him, the Senior Promotion Board identified and recommended 14 Deputy and Assistant Superintendents for promotion to the office of Superintendent of Police, and he is the second most senior serving Deputy Superintendent on the list.
He said that on December 16, 2020, he received information that his recommendation by the Commissioner of Police for promotion was denied and rejected by the PSC based on a pending disciplinary matter against him.
He said the disciplinary matter against him remains under investigation, and he is entitled to the presumption of innocence until proven otherwise. In this regard, he contends that the allegations of breach of discipline made against him are “wholly frivolous, and completely lack any merit.”
Prior to 2020, he added, he had never been cited, charged, or found guilty of any indiscipline or offence.
“By its conduct, the [PSC] has adopted the practice and policy not to promote Police officers with pending disciplinary complaints, regardless of the nature or seriousness of such complaints. Trivial and unsubstantiated complaints have been accorded the same weight as grave or serious allegations of indiscipline in denying the promotion to those against whom disciplinary complaints have been lodged.”
The senior Police officer further contends that the PSC abdicated its function by the delay it created in the resolution of the complaint made against him, which is still pending determination.
He argued that the PSC was under a duty to ensure that investigations were concluded expeditiously if it intended to rely on such pending allegations of indiscipline to deny promotion to those recommended for, or otherwise entitled to, promotion.
According to him, two Deputy Superintendents of Police; namely, Timothy Williams and Colin Henry, who were recommended for promotion and appointment by the PSC, were deemed unsuitable and not eligible for promotion by the Senior Promotion Board of the Police Force.
Against this backdrop, he submitted, the decision of the PSC is fundamentally unfair and unreasonable. He argues that the PSC’s failure to promptly investigate the matter against him created substantial unfairness in the promotion process, and renders its decision unlawful.
Through his lawyer, C.V. Satram, Deputy Superintendent Stanley contends that the PSC violated his fundamental rights to equality of treatment and equal protection of the law as guaranteed under Article 149D of the Constitution when it promoted ranks who are junior to him, and who have served less time in the Force than him.
In an affidavit, he outlined that he is the holder of a Diploma in Industrial Relations and Management, a Diploma in Public Management, and a Bachelor of Social Science Degree in Public Management. He added that he also holds a Certificate in Strategic Planning Unit (SPU), and is currently reading for a Commonwealth Master’s Degree in Public Administration at the University of Guyana.
Among other things, Stanley is asking the court for an Order of Certiorari quashing, nullifying, and/or vacating the decision of the PSC to supersede and promote ahead of him Deputy Superintendents Williams and Henry. Further, he is seeking a Consequential Order directing the PSC to appoint him to the office of Superintendent of Police.
The senior Police officer also wants the court to award him damages, interests, costs, and such further and other orders as may be just. His three colleagues have listed similar grounds in their application.
Concerning the action filed by Brutus, Chief Justice Roxane George has granted a conservatory order halting the promotions of several officers by the PSC until she pronounces on the complaints put forward by him.
This matter comes up for another hearing next Tuesday, January 12, 2020.