Myriad measures to mitigate violence could have contributed to preserving public order during the ‘Troubles’ in the first decade of this century. The People’s Progressive Party Civic (PPPC) administration’s equivocal approach to law and order, however, had the catastrophic consequences 0f condoning organised crime and aggravating public unrest. The PPPC ignored formal and official recommendations to eradicate crime and pursued practices which not only did not prevent but, actually, perpetuated crime.
This was the opinion of former President David Granger, speaking on his programme – The Public Interest. He pointed out that simmering unrest arising from the increasing number of cases of murder, money-laundering, narco-trafficking, gun crimes and police killings worsened after five desperadoes escaped from the Georgetown Prison in February 2002.
Mr. Granger acknowledged that, at first, the PPPC gave the impression of making the right moves by holding high-level meetings with the PNCR in April 2002 and issuing the ‘Vlissengen Accord’ condemning the incipient violence and agreeing to establish several stabilisation committees. The aim of the ‘Accord’ was not merely to mitigate crime but, also, to eradicate the causes of crime. Up to that time, the administration was thought to be seriously seeking to suppress crime. It received reports by UK Regional Advisor to initiate security assistance as early as 1999 and to implement the Guyana Reform Programme by the Symonds Group Limited since 2000.
The PPPC administration seemed to be on the right road. It issued a nine-point, $100 M plan; established the Border and National Security Committee; Disciplined Forces Commission; National Consultation on Crime and National Steering Committee on Crime. The UK Defence Advisory Team conducted a study of the security sector and a task force by the National Policing Improvement Agency International Academy and the Scottish Police College was set to implement the action plan. The National Assembly – in which the PPPC held a comfortable majority – also passed four anti-crime Bills − Criminal Law (Offences) Amendment Bill; prevention of Crimes (Amendment) Bill; Racial Hostility (Amendment) Bill; and, Evidence (Amendment) Bill – all in 2002.
The implementation of the counter-crime and police reform programmes, unfortunately, were in the hands of the Minister of Home Affairs, a former Defence Force officer who had been cashiered from military service. He was forced to resign as Minister under international pressure after a Commission of Inquiry investigated allegations that he was involved in managing a death squad. The dubious appointments of ‘acting’ Commissioners of Police, purges of senior Defence Force officers and the attempt to appoint a former USA police commissioner to high office compounded the chaos in the security sector at the height of the ‘Troubles’.
Granger lamented that legitimate measures to reform the security sector were rejected or neglected and were bound to fail without political will and professional officers to enforce them. He expressed the view that the PPPC administration seemed bent on pursuing a course of action which led to more murders until the extradition of a notorious narco-trafficker stanched the bloodshed. The deaths of scores of civilians and policemen could have been avoided had the road been taken for the timely implementation of legitimate measures for security sector reform. It was not.
