Wrong application

It appears that Brian Manning, the son of Prime Minister Patrick Manning, is in agreement with the Opposition UNC and various fledgling political parties, with the Keith Noel 136 Committee and other pressure groups, with the Chamber of Commerce and other business organisations, and with ordinary citizens everywhere. After all, given that the younger Manning has applied for a firearm licence to carry a 9mm pistol, it is reasonable to conclude that he, like all these others, also believes that the Government does not have the crime situation under control.

Even if this is not so, that is the message being sent by Brian Manning’s application. It may be that, as the son of the Prime Minister, he feels he has greater need for protection than other citizens. But, as the son of the Prime Minister living in the Prime Minister’s residence, young Manning has Special Branch protection just like his father. And, even if he didn’t, it would have been more politic to hire armed bodyguards than to get a gun for himself.

But perhaps an even more worrisome message is being sent by Police Commissioner Trevor Paul’s response to Brian Manning’s application. According to an exclusive report carried in Monday’s Newsday, the application for a Provisional Licence was granted within days. This is, to put it mildly, highly unusual. There are over 1,000 applications for Provisional Licences before the Firearms Section of the Police Service, with applicants taking six months to a year to get a response - and 80 percent of them are turned down.

The reason a response takes so long, apart from the usual bureaucratic sloth, is that all applicants must be interviewed in order to ensure that they are of good character; have a certificate testifying to such; are mentally and physically fit; are capable of using the firearm; and have need for such a weapon. It seems, however, that this procedure was not followed in the case of young Manning. And the question the CoP now has to answer is, Why not?

It is obviously not enough for the Head of the Firearms Bureau to assume that, because the applicant is the son of the Prime Minister, he meets all the specified criteria. And it is certainly not acceptable that, because the applicant is related to the Prime Minister, that his application should be allowed to jump the queue. All this only adds volume to the accusations, grown louder in recent times as certain high-profile persons have come before the courts, that the police are supporters of, or can be influenced by, politicians and partisan bias. And, when a Provisional Application is not only approved, but personally delivered by Special Branch officers, then the public has a right to worry about political influence in the Police Service.

This particular affair also comes at a time when the Government and Opposition are discussing the Police Reform Bills as part of their attempted exercise at cooperation. The Opposition has been insisting that the Prime Minister’s veto power over the appointment of the CoP be removed. Mr Manning has been equally adamant that this power will be kept; but the flouting of procedure with respect to a gun for his son will give added weight to the Opposition’s position. There is only one way out of this imbroglio. Mr Manning, elder or junior, must drop the application. If they do not, then the CoP must refuse to grant the Firearm Users Licence to Brian Manning. Any other course will only persuade the public that the arms of the Police Service can be twisted by political pressures.