By Mark DaCosta- Veteran journalist Adam Harris has reignited debate over the impartiality of Guyana’s justice system, questioning whether the law is being applied consistently or whether political affiliations and institutional status influence how cases are handled. In a commentary published on October 21, 2026, Harris examined a series of controversial cases involving prolonged detention, prosecutions that collapsed for lack of evidence, and delays in addressing serious allegations against senior law enforcement officials.
Taken together, these cases raise troubling questions about prosecutorial discretion, police conduct and accountability, and whether the principle of equal justice under the law is being upheld regardless of an individual’s political standing or position within the state.
Reflecting on the classic literary observation that the law can often manifest as an ass, Harris points to historical and contemporary precedents within our borders to substantiate his claim. He recounts a harrowing instance where an individual endured six years of remand on a murder charge, only for the High Court to reveal upon trial that no foundational evidence existed to warrant the indictment in the first place.
Inquiries directed to the Director of Public Prosecutions regarding how such a charge was sanctioned remained unanswered, setting a troubling precedent of institutional silence. According to Harris, this historic opacity foreshadowed a broader systemic trend wherein private criminal charges concerning alleged electoral fraud were absorbed by the state, only to languish in the courts for years while state witnesses consistently failed to establish criminal liability against the accused.
This trend of questionable state intervention extends to the application of modern legislation against political figures and dissidents. In his analysis, Harris highlights the prosecution of Kidackie Amsterdam under cybercrime statutes, a case that ultimately collapsed in court due to a lack of substantiating evidence.
Similarly, political activist Tacuma Ogunseye faced arrest weeks after allegedly making statements deemed harmful to racial harmony. Despite the absence of an initial arrest warrant, Ogunseye was detained, placed in physical restraints, and processed through the courts before a judicial determination that the state lacked the necessary evidence led to his complete discharge.
The commentary further examines the operational conduct of the Guyana Police Force through the lens of a recent high-profile interception involving businessman and Leader of the Opposition Azruddin Mohamed. Reports generated by law enforcement indicated that officers fired upon a vehicle near the residence of a senior intelligence officer after a shot was purportedly initiated from within the car. A subsequent search at the Kitty Police Station allegedly uncovered a firearm under the accelerator pedal containing three live rounds.
However, as Harris observes, formal charges brought against the occupants were confined to unlawful possession of a firearm and ammunition, conspicuously omitting any offense related to discharging a firearm in a public space. Furthermore, claims regarding heavy tint were publicly contradicted when physical evidence revealed clear glass, prompting state prosecutors to withdraw those assertions during proceedings and raising fundamental questions regarding the reliability of police testimony.
Compounding these procedural friction points are the administrative hurdles surrounding severe criminal allegations within the upper ranks of the police force itself. In the case of Deputy Police Commissioner Fizal Karimbaksh, who faces allegations of rape, public calls from senior government ministers initially highlighted deep structural hesitation before administrative leave was enforced to facilitate an unhindered investigation. Human Services Minister Vindya Persaud publicly stated that “a person should be held accountable, and by that, I mean there are no two ways about this, and due process should involve rape accused Fizal Karimbaksh going on leave to facilitate the investigation.”
Echoing these concerns, Governance and Parliamentary Affairs Minister Gail Teixeira remarked that “persons have been sent on leave in the public service for various issues, some serious, some minor,” while maintaining that “he should be charged, and the matter should run its course in court like everybody else who is charged with such serious crimes.” Former Prime Minister Sam Hinds similarly characterised the scenario as “an awful thing,” acknowledging the severe reputational damage to public institutions.
While administrative leave was eventually enacted, the initial friction and delays in triggering standard protocol stand in stark contrast to the swift, heavy-handed detention experienced by ordinary citizens or political opponents. For Harris and observers across our nation, this hesitancy when addressing alleged misconduct at the highest levels of law enforcement underscores a deeply concerning reality: when equal application gives way to expediency, the integrity of the law itself stands compromised.
