Latest update February 20th, 2025 12:39 PM
Aug 26, 2013 Letters
Dear Editor,
My girlfriend who is an avid follower of news from Guyana asked me about the 18-month sentence which was meted out to four policemen for allegedly assaulting a citizen. She wanted to know if this event marked the beginning of a new direction for the sometimes justifiably denigrated Guyana Police Force. I had to reflect for a moment before telling her that based upon information those ranks bore the full brunt of the law because very senior functionaries who are friendly with a close relative of the virtual complainant pressed the issue with the result that is now history. I realized that she was far from finished when she wanted to know if the detectives who caused the police case against the alleged killer of policeman Cleto to be discontinued based on complaints of torture by the suspect, had been similarly sanctioned. I had to admit that certain forces seemed to be at work not least of which was the issue of profiling, although-when pressed I was not at that stage ready to concede that race seemed to play a significant role.
The GPF as currently operating will not readily accept any reform program apart from paying lip service to the concept which I don’t think they even have the slightest clue about. I am prepared to debate this position as I sincerely hold the view that it is not in the interest of certain quarters to have a professional and accountable law enforcement agency. Members of the GPF have been known to allow investigations into matters to run in directions that ultimately are of benefit to vested interests. So is it any wonder that some matters end up where they do, leaving victims and survivors robbed of any real hope for justice? Sheema Mangar murder investigation seems to be headed the way of Monica Reece. Readers might also recall the ‘Beast’ Salim and Roger Khan arms cache incidents.
This unhealthy obsession with the Strategic Management Department of the GPF leads me to believe that it is being set up to be the fall guy since, as I stated before, certain elements both within and outside of the Force do not want a transparent, accountable, and professionally performing law enforcement body. The SMD may well be hamstrung and in no position to trumpet its achievement (if it has achieved anything) since its inception. We the citizens would like to know what difficulties the GPF is facing in its quest for modernization; we would like to know what work the SMD has been doing in that direction, and what institutional mechanism has been operationalized to develop and strengthen cooperation between its two components of sworn and civilian members.
I think that the whole concept of civilian oversight has not been fully grasped and therefore there are bound to be gaps in the implementation of reform measures. An oversight body which receives periodic performance reports from the GPF should be comprised of notable public figures. A few names come readily to mind and include Major Gen. (ret) Joe Singh, Capt. Gerald Gouveia, Mr. Stanley Ming, Col. Bruce Lovell, Ms. Amanda St. Aubyn, and Mr. Francis Carryl. These are no-nonsense results-oriented persons who will not embrace puerile excuses and obstructionist mentalities. I further would like to suggest that the current head of the SMD could be reassigned as Technical Advisor to the Minister of Home Affairs, who has his work cut out dealing with some over ambitious underperforming pretenders to knowledge who are way above their current or even future pay grade.
Sylvia St Romain
Feb 20, 2025
Kaieteur Sports- On the heels of the girl’s selection, the Guyana Under-21 boy’s hockey team has been selected for the 2025 PAHF Junior Challenge scheduled for Bridgetown, Barbados from 8th to...Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News – The assertion that “under international law, Venezuela is responsible for... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Ambassador to the US and the OAS, Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News-Two Executive Orders issued by U.S.... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]