Latest update August 29th, 2026 10:20 AM
Latest News
- Guyanese must see ExxonMobil disputed audit cost
- Canawaima back in service after days-long ban
- Indonesian nationals killed; 4 others injured in EBD smash-up
- Rescuers retrieve flood survivors caked in mud as death toll in Nepal-China border disaster climbs
- Tighter guard on oil fund needed as Guyana’s profits grow – Norton
These investigators are wrongly assigned by the police force
Dear Editor
Earlier this year after four investigators were employed by the Police Complaints Authority, I questioned whether or not they were legally empowered to investigate breaches of discipline under section 4 (a-z) of the Police ( Discipline) Act Chapter 17:01. I felt that section 5(1) of the Act debars them from doing so.
This Act stipulates the rank a person must hold in order for him or her to conduct investigations into breaches of discipline. The investigators did not fall within that ambit.
Section 5(1) states,” Every alleged commission of an offence against discipline under this Act shall be investigated as soon as practicable by a member of the Force not below the rank of sergeant and of a higher rank than the member of the Force who is alleged to have committed the offence”.
From a layman’s point of view the section is very pellucid. There is no legal morass.
The person conducting the investigation must be a member of the Force holding the rank of sergeant and of a higher rank than the rank who has committed the alleged offence.
Those employed by the Authority held the ranks of senior superintendent, chief inspector, inspector and captain in the police and army respectively, prior to their retirement.
Their appointments ceased when they exited the Force and Army. I know them well. They are all excellent investigators.
Frederick Caesar is dogged investigator. He is a graduate from the Federal Bureau of Investigation National Academy. He graduated the same time with Mr. Winston Felix MP
Minister of Citizenship. They cannot walk into the Authority with the ranks they previously held.
The Commissioner of Police or the Police Service Commission must first appoint / promote them to the requisite rank in order for them to legally perform the task as investigating officers in accordance with section 5(1) of the Act. Section 5, (2)-(11) also gives clear directions as to what must be done in relation to investigation of offences against discipline.
The investigators may also be breaching sections (2) and (3) However, due to constraint of space l will confine my argument to section 5(1) of the Act. Please permit me to backtrack a bit.
During this year the Authority and I exchanged letters to the editor.
The Authority did not address my specific fact in the issue. Instead, he posited that the investigators were not investigating.
They were gathering information as a result of complaints made to the PCA. Reports are then sent to the Commissioner of Police and the Police Service Commission with recommendation for disciplinary action against defaulting ranks wherever applicable.
If interviewing complainants and witnesses, interrogating alleged defaulters; visiting scenes of offences; collecting and seizing materials to be tendered as exhibits at a disciplinary inquiry as is the modus of the investigators is not investigating well then Hurricane Matthew did not batter Haiti and Florida’s East Coast recently.
The Chairman recommended that for my edification l read the Disciplined Forces Commission Report and the Police Complaints Authority Act.
I perused both documents. In relation to Inquiry Into Complaints Of Misconduct By Members of the Force, Section 7(1) of the Police Complaints Authority Act states,” The provision of this Part shall be in addition to, and not in derogation of, the provisions of the Police (Discipline) Act.”
The Act is very clear on the procedure on receipt of complaints. Section 9 (b) informs “where the Authority does not reject a complaint under paragraph (a), he shall refer it to the Commissioner for investigation and inquiry, under the Police (Discipline) Act.” Section 9 (2) of the Act states,”
When a complaint is referred to the Commissioner under subsection (1) by the Authority, the Commissioner shall cause the complaint to be investigated expeditiously under section 5 of the Police (Discipline) Act and a copy of the report of the investigating officer referred in section 5(4) of that Act shall be forwarded by the Commissioner, as soon as possible after the report is submitted, to the Authority for his comments.”
For the sake of emphasis let me repeat that the investigating officer must be a sergeant and of a rank higher than the rank that is alleged to have committed the offence in accordance with Section 5(1) of the Police (Discipline) Act alluded to earlier. Apparently the investigators employed by the Authority who are not members of the Force and have no rank are breaching section 5(1) by investigating alleged breaches of discipline committed by members of the Force and submitting reports to the Commissioner for action to be taken.
Clinton Conway
Assistant Commissioner of Police (rtd)
Editor’s note; because of the length, this letter will conclude in tomorrow’s edition
Share this:
Discover more from Kaieteur News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Similar Articles
One thought on “These investigators are wrongly assigned by the police force”
hits
Blunt of the day
Sports
Features/Columnists
Sir. Ronald Sanders
The GHK Lall Column
Weekend Cartoon
Absolutely Clinton, on the ball as usual. This intellectually lazy perspective that has come to represent things done in the force today is nauseating. It is not that these people are not qualified to investigate acts of police indiscipline, although I would have preferred for these positions to be given to those who retired at the rank of Inspector or Sergeants, rather than to gazetted ranks. It is counterproductive because, those who are charged for any disciplinary matter arising out of these investigations can simply move that they be dismissed on the basis that the findings that led to them being charged came from an unauthorized source.