Police prosecutors have an unenviable job

Oct 20, 2008 News

---

While the Guyana Police Force is scoring some successes in apprehending criminals, the increasing number of criminal matters taken before the courts is taking its toll on prosecutors.
On any given day, a single police prosecutor is tasked with presenting no less than 15 new matters to add to scores of already existing cases.
And as if this is not enough, take into consideration the burden of the absence of both civilian and police witnesses.
“Prosecutors do not only prosecute, they also have to fall in with normal police work sometimes, which leaves very little time for them to really study files and other things associated with their substantive work,” said a leading police official.
Could you imagine summoning a witness for a matter that occurred last year, and when you check, the person is not living at the same address?
“They have to be constantly requesting adjournments, creating a situation that looks bad for the police,” the officer said.
One prosecutor lamented that sometimes they do not get the recognition that they deserve.
“Sometimes, the detectives present cases with lots of loop holes, and it is up to us to ensure that we do not bungle the case,” the prosecutor told this newspaper.
Within recent times there has been no overt recognition of prosecutors’ work whenever the police hold their awards ceremony. “It is always the detectives who get the recognition.”
Unlike other police ranks, prosecutors sometimes have to work through their lunch hours at the behest of some magistrates who are bogged down with a heavy workload.
“When a prosecutor has to work to the end of the adjournment of a particular court at four in the afternoon, how much time does he or she have to prepare for another full day of court?” the official asked.
But perhaps the major apprehension of a police prosecutor, with his limited knowledge of the interpretations of several laws, is coming up against high priced senior counsels.
Sometimes you sit in the courts of Guyana and wonder about the level of police prosecution in the several matters that engage the judicial sector.
To put minimally trained police inspectors and sergeants up against high priced, highly qualified attorneys is like putting a Bedford truck to race against a Ferrari.
In most cases, it is observed, the police prosecution is woefully under-prepared to deal with some of the matters that are placed under police control, and had it not been for the seeming cooperation of magistrates, the prosecution will come up woefully short.
Take a simple case of a man charged for possession of narcotics. At the initial hearing, the police prosecutor will tell the court that the drug was found on the defendant when is fact this is still to be proven during the trial.
Yet it is on this basis that the magistrate will sometimes remand the defendant to prison, although the prosecutor hardly puts up a valid reason for the refusal of bail.
“The prevalence of the offence” is one of the most common reasons put forward by prosecutors in objecting to bail.
“What has the prevalence of an offence got to do with the granting of bail, especially since the accused person has not yet been found guilty of what he is accused of?” asked one leading defence counsel.
Bail is not meant to be punitive, but yet it appears as if the magistracy is remanding persons based on some flimsy submissions by the police prosecutors.
Perhaps the one-year prosecutors’ course is inadequate to equip police ranks with the necessary knowledge to come up against the well trained defence attorneys.
On many occasions, the prosecutions depend too heavily on the Chambers of the Director of Public Prosecutions for the simplest of matters.
However, while this may not be enough, some prosecutors are trying their best to present good cases.
“Some prosecutors need to do more reading to bring themselves up to date with several aspects of the law. They also need to acquaint themselves with the various files of cases that they are responsible for,” the official stated.
In most of the developed countries, especially in the United States of America, prosecutors are referred to as district attorneys.
These district attorneys, although integrally linked to the police, are qualified in the practice of the law.
In Guyana, there are cases when no sooner a policeman qualifies as an attorney than he goes into private practice.
“While there is much to hear in court, which can help to advance one’s career, there are other qualities that are necessary,” observed a court official.
These include the ability to speak effectively, personal confidence in what one is doing coupled with the knowledge of procedures in court, particularly those which evolve from time to time.
Any discussion on the work of prosecutors would not be complete without mentioning corruption, which has reached epidemic proportions in Guyana.
With the wanton operations of ‘touts’ at the Georgetown Magistrates’ Courts, it would appear that the prosecution is facilitating this type of activity.
To secure bail is as easy as taking a candy from a baby. Just talk to one of the ‘touts’.
The touts are not officers of the court, so it is easy to see who facilitates their activities.
Former Chief Magistrate Juliet Holder-Allen had desperately tried to eliminate the practice, but from all appearances, it has returned.
Should these observations be taken seriously, there will be a lot more confidence in the police prosecution, which in some instances appear to be the rule of ‘winning a case at all cost’.

---

---