Police examination delay scandalous

“Scandalous,” was how Chief Justice Satnarine Sharma described the delay of the police examination results Friday. But the CJ noted that while the Court of Appeal  may be sympathetic to the plight of policemen, legal action should have been taken against the Examin-ation Board which was directly responsible for the results and not the Director of Public Administration (DPA) and the Police Service Commission (PSC). Dealing with grounds of appeal on the issue of separation of power, Sharma further noted that there  is political infusion in everything and sometimes political directorates in some ways create a monster.

He said a balance must be struck because the defusion of power to various bodies makes them less likely to be susceptible to abuse. On the other hand,  he said, when there is a body like the PSC concentrated with all this power in its hands, the very thing the Court tries to protect it from, and insulate it from is the political directorate who is capable of being a law unto itself and could readily create opportunity for an abuse of power. He suggested that this is less likely to happen if the powers were distributed. In fact, one of the underpinnings of the separation of power is to distribute. But a certain amount of overlapping is going to take place. It’s unavoidable, he added.

The Court which includes CJ Sharma and Justices Rolston Nelson and Wendell Kangaloo, was at the time dealing with an appeal brought against  three policemen — Eusebio Cooper, Clifford Balbosa and Derek Junior Birjah by  the DPA and the PSC, following a ruling by Justice David Myers. Shortly after the judges’ ruling the examination results were released, but the State continued with the appeal to deal with certain other rulings made by the judge. Attorney Fyaad Hosein SC represented the State while Dr Fenton Ramsa-hoye SC and Anand Ramlogan were for the policemen. The Court reserved its judgment in the matter.