The police are supposed to be the upholders of the law. Their motto is to serve and protect. In so doing they must understand the parameters within which they work. They are the people who must enforce the law. In some countries the police recruit must pass through an academy. In Guyana the recruit passes through the police training school.
The major handbooks must be the book that details standard operations procedure; the Standing Orders. That book informs the police how and when they should make an arrest in the same way the United States insists that the police must read an individual the Miranda Rights.
Drivers always use the left side of the road; pedestrians are advised to use the right-hand side and sidewalks. The list is long. The police are required to intervene whenever there is a breach of the law. But to make such interventions the police must be aware of the law. If a motorcyclist rides without a helmet he can be prosecuted.
Recently, one could not help but conclude that the police simply do not know the law. The court recently awarded retired Assistant Commissioner of Police, Paul Slowe, a sum of money to settle a wrongful arrest case
Slowe had turned up to court on October 15, 2021, in response to an order to appear to face a charge. While waiting for his lawyer and the court to begin, four ranks of the Special Organised Crime Unit tried to arrest him. The arrest was tied to the very matter for which Slowe was in court.
The SOCU ranks were obviously unaware of the law. Despite his explanation, the ranks insisted on arresting Slowe. In the end Slowe prevailed in his refusal to be arrested. He later took the matter to court. Almost five years to the day he got a judgement against the police. None of the men who tried to force the arrest was penalised.
On another occasion, a lawyer was in the SOCU offices with her client. She kept advising her client to refrain from answering any question. That is standard legal advice from a lawyer to a client. Imagine the police arrested the lawyer for advising her client. It took the intervention of the Attorney General for SOCU to recognize its mistake. Again, the court offered compensation for the wrongful arrest.
These are just two incidents.
The most talked about incident involved the Opposition Leader. He had used his speedboat to visit some communities in the northwestern part of the country. It is clear that his movements were tracked because when he arrived at the mouth of the Demerara River the police were waiting for him. With them were the coastguard. The police public relations department has since issued a number of press statements.
One statement claimed that the coastguard intercepted the vessel. At the same time the vessel was moored at a wharf at Friendship. There could have been no interception. The problem involved the law pertaining to a stop and search. The law does not give the police the right to stop and search anyone or any vehicle on a whim.
The law is clear that they must have suspicion that the person or vehicle is transporting something illegal, a suspicion that the vehicle or person is fleeing the scene of a crime, or such similar conditions. The police and coastguard claimed that they were stopping the vehicle based on reasonable suspicion. They needed to explain their suspicion.
A Divisional Commander who turned up at the scene also uttered the catch phrase of reasonable suspicion. Hours later the police public relations then stated that someone saw a black bag being tossed from the boat. That would have been reasonable suspicion, but no rank ever mentioned this fact.
Police don’t lie so if one saw a bag being tossed—a black bag in the dead of night—into a river and sinking immediately– then so be it. There have been no reports of efforts being made to recover the bag. There has also been no consideration of air being trapped in the bag at the time it was thrown and therefore could not sink, unless it contained something that was extremely heavy.
It is impossible that such a large number of police ranks are unaware of the law, having passed through the Police Training School. Police ranks when confronted after a mistake would merely say that they are following orders.
More often than not the orders are based on political directives. Leader of the People’s National Congress Reform Aubrey Norton had cause to confront two policemen on motorcycles. They had followed him from an assignment on lower East Coast Demerara. The policemen could not offer an explanation.
Later, Police Commissioner Clifton Hicken said that he never gave such instructions. It never became known if he found out who did. The motorcycle policemen were never sanctioned for acting outside their remit.
Members of the public accuse the police of being the tools of the government of the day. And the government has often been made to pay for such involvement. The money comes from the public treasury hence it is taxpayers’ money. The question, then, is whether policemen in training are being taught the law. This could be frightening if they are not especially since policemen are often armed.
