Give back veto power to PM

Speaking at a Port-of-Spain Rotary luncheon at Fitzblackman Drive, Woodbrook, yesterday, Deosaran made reference to Terrence Prince, a man who spent nine years in prison even though the offence that he had committed the maximum sentence was five years.

“The broken institutions, the injustices they unwittingly commit had him waiting nine for a trial.

There are many others like him waiting nine, ten years for their case to be heard in court and they cannot see their lawyers, they cannot have their trial duly executed.

The focus is on the Police Service naturally and inevitably. Is the Police Service capable of doing a better job? Yes, but you have a tangled web of institutions bearing themselves upon the poor Police Service.

“I wonder where the Police Commissioner, active or not, gets the time to supervise and execute his fundamental objectives within and for the Police Service? He is answerable to the Police Complaints Authority, the Police Service Commission, the National Security Council, the Ministry of National Security in terms of resources and Government policy...

now you want to bring in a Police Management Board and a Police Inspectorate. If that is done in the current infrastructure, I feel sorry for the Police Commissioner,” he said.

Deosaran said because of the complexity of appointing a Police Commissioner , the Prime Minister should be given back the veto power in terms of appointing a commissioner or deputy commissioner.

“Cut out some of the bureaucracy because in any case the Prime Minister has a veto already in the existing circumstances. He has a back door veto. The veto request does not come to him directly.

Before you could appoint a Commissioner of Police or deputy Commissioner, that nomination has to come from a private firm through the Service Commission, goes to the President, comes to Parliament and majority vote where that appointment has to be approved or not.

“Who controls the majority in Parliament? The Cabinet, and who controls the Cabinet? The Prime Minister, so whatever the Prime Minister chooses that is how the Cabinet and the majority will have to vote, so the veto is still there. Revoke that and make it clearer now and simplify the process. As far as I can see, it can be done and that would provide the extent of civilian control you want because you can expect a Prime Minister to exercise good judgement, no prejudice, no discrimination, but satisfy himself with the competence, the ability and the experience of the person put before him,” Deosaran said.

He said former police commissioner Dwayne Gibbs was an outstanding gentleman, but he complained bitterly about how many people he had to account to especially when the interests and requests upon him happened to be in competition with one another.

However, Deosaran said many of them were constitutional bodies too, and questioned which master would be served because the commissioner was in a position of having an obligation to serve too many masters.

“I thought the last government and this current one would have shown a greater sense of urgency in cleaning up this complicated system in which the Police Service has to operate. My view now is to simplify the process without losing the substance of oversight and control.

“You want the Police Service to feel free and confident to investigate without fear or favour. The other principle is that in a democracy you must have some extent of civilian control over your National Security services and your Police Service. The legislation so far in trying to bind those two principles have resulted in a tangled web of complexity to the questionable performance of the Police Service,” Deosaran claimed.