PCA must come clean on police complaints

To this end, Lewis also informed that the Professional Standards Bureau (PSB), which has internal responsibility for investigating allegations of wrongdoing, had been mandated by the CoP to pursue matters involving officers without fear or favour, and that “what the public had been witness to of late is the PSB discharging its duty.” There is no need here to repeat the mountain of evidence to the contrary, in relation to the Police Service’s abysmally poor performance to date and the hundreds of annual recorded complaints against police officers. We are however agreed that a primary duty of any CoP, acting or confirmed, is to earn the public’s trust.

In pursuit of this duty, acting CoP Stephen Williams, as head, is professionally and personally responsible for generating public trust and confidence in the TT PS.

One of the ways he is expected to do so is by containing and instituting safeguards against criminal elements within the service.

It is not sufficient for any respectable commissioner to infer that the TT PS is doing all that it could, notwithstanding any limitations to his acting position.

Williams has been acting in the position for a number of years.

The point of this letter surrounds the TT PS’ statement that there exists a “purposeful action of the commissioner… to purge the service” (of police gangs/criminal elements).

The question arises whether the TT PS statement that the commissioner has purposely acted to do just that is a verifiably true or misleading and false statement. Can a commissioner’s call to action on the part of the PSB be taken as an action in and of itself, and a purposeful one at that? The TT PS-issued statement can be described as hardly anything more than a call on the part of the CoP which makes it farcical without reasonable grounds for believing that the commissioner and his team of senior officers with oversight are imposing/will impose sanctions as a consequence of a non-adherence to his call to act.

Prior conduct (impartial investigations properly concluded and acted on) is evidence of future performance.

The evidence does not appear promising.

In light of the TT PS’ public statement and mandate of the PSB to investigate complaints against its own, it creates a duty on the Police Complaints Authority (PCA), the authority with civilian oversight of law enforcement officers, to inform the population whether the PSB of the Police Service, in carrying out its responsibilities, has had any civil or criminal actions registered against any of its members to date and, if so, what is the nature of these complaints, the seniority of officers complained against, PSB and TT PS responses, outcomes and remedies including recommendations.

The PCA may determine whether the PSB is capable of compliance, acting in compliance, discharging its responsibilities with integrity and generating civilian trust, based on the PCA’s collection of data.

Kathleen Pinder via email