Justice Jainarayan Singh’s public complaint last week seemed to highlight much that has gone wrong with the criminal justice system, law enforcement and human rights in this country. Although the complaint concerns his personal benefit, its implications for the public interest are immense.

Singh retired as a high court judge a year ago and lamented that his superannuation benefits had been withheld. He was convinced that one of the reasons for the delay was his decision to award $125 million in compensation to the owner of Toucan Suites apartment building last October. He had ruled that the Joint Services were hasty in their 11-hour siege of the apartment building in February 2000 in which a fugitive Linden ‘Blackie’ London was killed and the building destroyed.

By any measure, the siege was a reckless overreaction in which unreasonable force was used. Captain Wycliffe McAllister, a key witness, told the aborted inquest that troops commanded by at least three military officers – Captain Michael Shahoud, Captain David Clarke and Captain David Foo – were involved in the siege.

McAllister gave evidence that an 82 mm anti-tank recoilless gun was employed to fire at the building − a first for internal security in an urban area in this country.  McAllister also stated that he saw policemen “throwing gasolene and deliberately setting the [building] ablaze,” destroying it completely. Although McAllister informed the police that he had persuaded the fugitive to discard his weapon and surrender, the man was shot dead on sight.

These actions led to the litigation by the proprietor and the ruling by Justice Singh. But the destruction of property, the killing of persons and the abuse of human rights have occurred with frightening frequency elsewhere with less favourable results for the victims.

Back in October 2005, Minister of Home Affairs  Gail Teixeira sanctioned ‘Operation Stiletto’ in which over 140 persons from the Buxton-Friendship neighbourhood were arrested without cause, taken to Eve Leary to be documented, fingerprinted and photographed. The Guyana Human Rights Association condemned the operation as “an ill-prepared, operational and human rights nightmare, with likely social and political repercussions the exact opposite of what is required.” Teixeira dismissed the criticisms as “absolute poppycock.”

In another incident, in September 2007, Donna Herod − a 47-year-old mother of nine − was shot dead while escorting her child from school during a Joint Services operation in Buxton-Friendship. The next month, two men were shot dead and Kenya Headley, a 19-month-old toddler, was injured when a stray bullet hit her neck while she was asleep in a chair in her parents’ living room during another raid. Compensation has never been paid to the relatives of the victims.

During ‘Operation Restore Order’ when house-to-house searches in Buxton-Friendship were the order of the day, this newspaper carried reports of soldiers and policemen barging into private homes without search warrants, ransacking personal belongings, emptying clothing and other articles on the floor and leaving empty-handed. Vendors’ stalls were damaged, villagers were arrested and some complained of having been tortured. Others might have been killed unlawfully. Most victims and their relatives – impeded by inexperienced lawyers, insufficient funds, ignorance of the law and impatience with the courts – make poor plaintiffs. They lack the resources to seek justice like the proprietor of Toucan Suites.

In the final analysis, Justice Singh averred that his order was influenced by the excesses of the Joint Services. In that regard, his Toucan Suites decision can be a turning point for pubic law. Military and police commanders must understand that they will be held accountable for abuses committed on operations and must recognise that such recklessness can be costly.