Suspended SRP sends pre-action protocol letter to Acting CoP

The letter was sent to the Acting CoP on Tuesday, however Williams is out of the country and is due back tomorrow.

On his return he is expected to seek legal advice on the matter.

The SRP in question received her suspension letter last week Tuesday in which she was accused of “bringing into disrepute the police service” and she was informed that she will receive no pay during her suspension.

The SRP became embroiled in a raging controversy after photos of her posing in her police uniform with her legs upraised went viral on social media.

The pre-action protocol letter sent by Rodriguez and De Silva which was made available to Newsday also called on the Acting CoP to reconsider his decision to suspend their client without pay. Rodriguez and De Silva accused the Acting CoP of failing to provide their client with the particulars of the disciplinary offence, and the “circumstances attributable to the investigation to be conducted”.

The letter continued: “It is a basic requirement of natural justice that an individual is notified of the particulars of a disciplinary offence alleged to have been committed by him or her. It is also necessary that our client is provided with the particulars of the offence so that she can be allowed meaningful participation in the investigation process.

Further, the disciplinary punishment of SRP officers is dealt with comprehensively under section 5 of the Special Reserve Police Act, Chapter 15:03 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) of the Laws of Trinidad and Tobago”.

The letter from Rodriguez and De Silva also stated “Section 5 of the Act identifies the disciplinary offences for which an SRP officer can be charged and the procedure to be followed after such charge is preferred.

The attorneys also noted that the Act further identifies that disciplinary punishments are to be dealt with by the officer in command of her division with the SRP officer having a right of appeal to the Commissioner of Police if dissatisfied by the decision of the officer in command.“By your decision to issue this notice of cessation under your hand, you have effectively usurped the function of the officer in command and therefore you have stripped our client of any right of appeal to which she is entitled. Your decision to suspend our client without pay will result in her significant hardship”, the letter concluded.