Brutus wants High Court to quash PSC Tribunal

Jan 29, 2025 News

---

Kaieteur News- Embattled Assistant Commissioner of Police, Calvin Brutus, on Monday called on the High Court to quash all summons issued by the Tribunal established by Police Service Commission (PSC) to investigate him.

In a $100M lawsuit filed against the PSC, the Attorney General and the Tribunal, Brutus said his constitutional rights have been breached making specific reference to Articles 8, 38, 39, 40, 65, 122(A), 141, 144, 149 and 154 (A). These articles pertain to his protection under the law, due process, and the right to a fair trial.

The senior police officer is also asking the court to grant a permanent injunction or conservatory order preventing the Tribunal from investigating him or an interim injunction or conservatory order preventing the Tribunal from discharging its mandate pending the hearing and determination of the extant criminal charges against him in all courts of law.

On January 22, 2025 the PSC appointed a special tribunal to investigate a series of serious disciplinary charges Brutus. The Tribunal includes Assistant Solicitor General and Chairperson of the Tribunal Shoshanna Lall, Attorney Keoma Griffith and Seelall Persaud (former Commissioner of Police and present employee of the State).

Brutus was scheduled to appear before the Tribunal on the same day but failed to attend. The PSC in the statement outlined that Brutus was later summoned to appear on January 27; however, he did not attend the hearing.

The Assistant Commissioner of Police said that the Tribunal established by the PSC has “no power to compel the attendance of any witness or party who at the time of his or her summons to attend is charged with a criminal offence born of the circumstances the Tribunal is charged with inquiring into.”

He argued that any such compulsion will be contrary to his right to a fair trial, equality of arms, due process and the protection of the law.

Brutus, in his Fixed Date Application, has also asked the court to declare that the “State of Guyana has breached its duty to ensure that every person (specifically Calvin Brutus) charged with a criminal offence is given a fair trial.” He submitted that in his circumstance, the outcome of him attending the Tribunal is likely to impugn the fairness of his criminal prosecution.

In his Affidavit, Brutus said that attending the Tribunal could jeopardize his ongoing criminal case at the Georgetown Magistrates’ Court.

Brutus, who is facing over 240 criminal charges, claims the State is exposing him to self-incriminatory testimony, risking compulsion and adverse sanctions.

In the affidavit filed by Brutus, it was argued that remaining absent from the hearings and protecting his job is preferable to risking a guilty finding by the Tribunal, which could lead to his dismissal.

Brutus stated in the affidavit that he was on 14 days sick leave and was never summoned to the Tribunal. “I learnt from the media by way of a Police Service Commission press release that I am to appear at the Tribunal on Monday January 27, 2025. I never received any such notice or summons,” Brutus said in the document.

The senior cop stated that he was served with documents on January 17, 2025 by Deputy Commissioner Errol Watts. “One of the documents was a letter from the Police Service Commission notifying me that a Tribunal had been set up to try me for the offences of breach of discipline.”

He added, “I received a bundle attached to it which had identical documents and charges for the offences for which I am before the Court charged criminally in 261 charges.

As a result of the institution’s alleged breach, Brutus’ lawyer Eusi Anderson outlined several reasons for not attending the Tribunal hearings.

“The applicant sought not to attend or be summoned to attend the Tribunal in so far as he remains charged for a criminal offence born of the factual circumstances the Tribunal is enquiring into his attendance and participation risk the jeopardy of giving answers which can be deemed false by the commissioners in their  sole discretion, or in the extreme, his non-participation, by silence when present or absent altogether, can be constructed as contempt which is punishable by the commission, with an adverse finding that he is guilty of the offence charged and dismissed from the Guyana Police Force,” Anderson explained.

Given these claims, Brutus, through his attorneys Eusi Anderson and Darren Wade, argues that he is entitled to damages due to the emotional trauma, anxiety, and distress caused by the State’s actions.

“All these consequences of the breach were foreseeable and within the realm of possibilities when State actors proceeded to issue the said summons to witness,” the document stated.

Further, Anderson told Kaieteur News that his client would not appear at the PSC Tribunal.

“Brutus is not at the hearing, and he will never be present at the hearing,” the lawyer said.

Meanwhile, in a Facebook post, Brutus expressed his frustration with the situation: “I will not be the State’s whipping boy or poster boy as they seek to give the nation the false hope that they are fighting alleged corruption. Such a fight would be more effective if it starts at Main Street and New Garden Street respectively. There are procedures and steps to follow when taking certain actions, and the State should embrace those practices which are provided for in the Constitution. It is because of their unwillingness to do so that I have challenged the configuration of the Tribunal which was established to target me.”

(Brutus wants High Court to quash PSC Tribunal)

---

• affidavit, Calvin Brutus, law suit, PSC, Tribunal

---