McBean wrongful dismissal case…Retired ACP Slowe, plaintiff take the stand

Apr 24, 2013 News

By Zena Henry
Retired Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) Paul Slowe gave evidence pertaining to the procedural process of police officers wishing to go on leave aboard, when the wrongful dismissal matter of former Superintendent of Police Simon McBean was called before Chief Justice Ian Chang yesterday.

Former Supt. of Police, Simon McBean

McBean was in 2009 dismissed from the Guyana Police Force for allegedly leaving the country on a study scholarship without permission.
The officer, who was accepted as a former senior member of the force and a former Deputy Commissioner of Operations among other things, testified on the grounds of having in-depth knowledge in regard to this matter. He told the court, while being led by Attorney-at-law Patrice Henry, that all permission for leave; whether annual leave, sick leave or study has to be granted by the Ministry of Home Affairs.
He said that while annual leave may have its specified time; one can attain their study leave during that period when requested since that time is used at the discretion of the applicant. Sick leave, however, varies, depending on the length of time needed.
He added that no matter the rank or type of leave, all authorisation is from Home Affairs Ministry, and leave may surpass 28 days with pay, depending on the nature of problem.
Slowe said that to his knowledge, McBean was granted vacation leave but not study leave and added that he had not seen any approval by the Home Affairs Ministry which authorised the former Superintendent going on study leave.
When asked, the former police officer confirmed that it is force policy that officers levitate themselves academically. Slowe named several officers who during their time in the police force, attained academic achievements and said that during any study course, the same procedures taken by McBean have always been followed by these officers.
Slowe said he too could recall at least six instances where he was on training courses where he became ill and submitted sick leave through the Consulate or embassy to Guyana, of the country where the course was being held.
Apart from that, Slowe recalled the force’s administration department congratulating McBean on being awarded a full scholarship to study abroad. He said McBean had been invited to an administration meeting where several Divisional Commanders were present, including the late Police Commissioner Henry Greene who assured the complainant that the force would support him in his quest for higher learning.
When cross examined by Pritima Kissoon who is representing the office of the Attorney General and the Police Service Commission, Slowe said he is unaware of the effects of an officer failing to return to duty after leave would have been over, since he is unaware of any such a situation.

Retired Assistant Commissioner, Paul Slowe

He continued that he was unaware that McBean was granted any further leave after his vacation leave had expired. In re-examination, Slowe said that he was also unaware of any document showing that McBean was not granted the extended leave.
McBean also took the stand yesterday to be cross examined by the defendants’ lawyer. He said that he had submitted an application for study leave but did not receive a response, when Kissoon told the witness that he was denied study leave.
He refuted claims that the vacation leave was granted instead of the study leave saying that he was entitled to that study leave. He said for little more than eight months he had been away from duties, but that time further entailed his sick period.
He agreed when Kissoon asked whether he knew that if he had not returned subsequent to his leave he would be dismissed. But McBean further added that his dismissal as he knew it as an officer would depend on him not following the necessary procedures if something came up preventing him from returning to duty.
Kissoon further asked the witness about symptoms he experienced during his sickness, but the court related to the lawyer that her question could be answered by the tendered document of the foreign doctor who tended to McBean during his illness.
Further along the cross examination, McBean strongly denied that he did not respond to a request by the force verifying his study in London. He charged that the letter for the verification was sent to the university and he was not the one who had to respond, despite Kissoon claiming that the letter was addressed to him.
McBean explained that the letter he received was requesting that he give authorisation for the information to be released since the university would have to verify the information and he (McBean) would have to give authorisation since the information could not be released without a student’s permission.
The matter was adjourned to next Monday (April 28) when the defence is expected to call its last witness. The plaintiff’s lawyers have closed their case.