Latest update January 1st, 2025 1:00 AM
May 25, 2021 News
– Lawyer contends promotion without involvement of promotion Board is unfair, arbitrary
Kaieteur News – The High Court is likely to rule on the case filed to challenge the Police Service Commission (PSC) over its practices in promoting senior ranks of the Guyana Police Force (GPF) on June 18 next.
Attorney C. V. Satram, who is representing several officers in the case, is contending inter alia, that a process devoid of the involvement of the Police Promotion Board is unfair, arbitrary and lacks transparency.
As such, the attorney asked the court to conduct a Judicial review of the procedure and operations of the PSC and make declarations that the practice is unlawful and in contravention of their rights to be promoted as officers of the GPF.
The case came up before Chief Justice (ag), Roxane George-Wiltshire, at the High Court in Georgetown yesterday. During a hearing of the matter, the acting Chief Justice noted concerns over a declaration being sought against the Police Service Commission (PSC) by Senior Superintendent of Police, Calvin Brutus, and others.
Brutus is among those asking the Court for a declaration that the practice of the PSC to use disciplinary matters as the basis for denying promotion as unlawful. However Justice George-Wiltshire noted, “We have to be very, very careful in making a declaration in that frame.”
“I think that it is very, very wide. This is not the only service commission. There are a number of other service commissions and I am very concerned at the breadth of the declaration sought in this regard, given the implications not only to this matter but to the entire Public and Teaching Service and for that matter maybe even the Judicial Service Commission,” she said.
Towards the end of the hearing, the CJ granted permission for Satram to file additional submissions on behalf of his clients. The documents have been served on Attorney General, Anil Nandlall, SC, who, along with the PSC, are the named respondents in the case.
In the submissions, the lawyer has raised several questions over the procedure as well as rights of officers as it regards the promotions. He stressed that it was never intended that the PSC would operate without judicial scrutiny.
According to Satram, the autonomy which was afforded to the PSC by the Constitution does not allow it to act entirely as it sees fit in the exercise of powers conferred upon it.
He contends that, “it is clear therefore that the decisions of the Commission are amenable to judicial review and the Commission is bound by considerations of fairness. It is also clear that the Commission is bound by the fundamental rights guarantees found at Article 137 to 153 of the Constitution.”
“As a general rule, the reviewing Court is not entitled to substitute its own views for those of the primary decision maker…It is for the Courts to say what the law is. If the PSC commits an error of law, the question as to whether it was reasonable or permissible or within its discretion is irrelevant,” he added.
Further, Satram noted that while the Applicants in each case do not deny that the PSC has power to promote and discipline them, the allegation is that the powers and discretion vested in the Commission have not been properly and fairly exercised.
“It is the legality of the decisions made by the PSC which is under challenge,” he said.
Addressing issues related to the procedure for promotion, the attorney noted that the PSC does not interview ranks for promotion and has never done so.
He said, “It [the PSC] has always relied on the recommendations of the Commissioner of Police who is part of a larger Promotion Board which consists of Senior Officers from various divisions of the Police Force.”
Further outlining the process, the lawyer noted that the PSC should be able to act outside of the promotion board when it comes to promoting officers.
As such, he said that any attempt by the PSC to separate itself from the process which it has relied on for decades is disingenuous and can only result in arbitrary appointments.
Satram added that, “the system of promotion devoid of the recommendations of the Promotion Board is unfair, arbitrary and lacks transparency. The members of the PSC perform their functions on a part-time basis and know very little, if anything, about the ranks they are required to promote, other than what is told to them by the Police Force itself.”
He noted that the Commission cannot act in total disregard of the recommendations of the Promotion Board.
“The two aspects of the promotion system involving the Promotion Board and the PSC are inextricably bound and together serve to promote a system of promotions which is fair, consistent and transparent. The question is whether it is unfair for the PSC to depart from or ignore the process specified in Police Force Standing Order 22, and the further question is whether it ought to afford a hearing to ranks affected by its decision to depart from this process and give good and adequate reasons for departing from it,” he said in his submissions.
Dec 31, 2024
By Rawle Toney Kaieteur Sports- In the rich tapestry of Guyanese sports, few names shine as brightly as Keevin Allicock. A prodigious talent with the rare blend of skill, charisma, and grit, Allicock...Kaieteur News- Guyana recorded just over 10,000 dengue cases in 2024, Health Minister Dr. Frank Anthony revealed during an... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News- The year 2024 has underscored a grim reality: poverty continues to be an unyielding... 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]