Dear Editor,

The picture of the 15-year-old with his front midsection burnt due to torture by the police, while he was held in custody, which appeared on the front page of Kaieteur News (KN 10.31.09), was indeed shocking to say the least. The fact that this is the torture of a child demonstrates the level of brutishness that is now employed in law enforcement.

What is more troubling is the political administration’s continued seeming lack of outrage and derision about police brutality. Even as this blatant act of torture is headlined in the newspapers, the PPP General Secretary’s first response is to issue a statement reiterating that the administration does not condone torture. If this were the case then one would expect more immediate outrage and condemnation. But I suspect the PPP is waiting to see the level of outrage in the society before calculating its usual empty promise to investigate, and then wait for Guyanese’s short memories to fade. The PPP General Secretary’s reiteration that the PPP does not condone torture, of course, contradicts statements from other officials in the government such as the statement from the Minister of Agriculture that sought to redefine cases of torture as mere ‘roughing up’ and more recently from the Minister of Home Affairs which implied that the society should not concern itself with the plight of the perpetrators. The adage innocent until proven guilty apparently does not apply.

Even as the graphic image of torture found itself on the front page of a newspaper, the cases of Patrick Jones, David Leander, Alvin Wilson, Michael Dunn and others still await justice. The callousness with which the ruling administration has treated human rights violations inspires little confidence that this case will be taken seriously and the Government will undertake the urgent reform that is necessary. Police brutality continues to be a central problem in Guyana and more often than not, it is the urban poor who are disproportionately victims of excessive force by police officers. This coercive behaviour as a means of urban control is not new, and relates to the unchecked discretion in the use of force that the political administrations has been willing to give law enforcement.  The very fact that it is the urban poor who are the majority of victims of extra-judicial killing and other forms of police brutality is the reason that no urgent need exists for reform of the police force. It is more important to suspect the British violation of Guyana’s sovereignty than it is to rectify the police violation of Guyanese human rights. Human rights violation by the police is ultimately the concern of government, and if government lacks concern then government can be charged with violating citizens’ human rights because the Guyana Police Force is the responsibility of government.

However, the issue of human rights violations does not stop at acts of torture, which seem to get the most outrage. There is an inventory of hundreds of Guyanese young men killed extra-judicially (Jermaine still awaits justice) by the police and the government paramilitary force the, ‘phantom squad,’ outsourced to Roger Khan, who still await justice.

Let me not sound like if the political opposition in Guyana is void of blame for allowing this situation to get out of control. It is the job of the opposition to keep issues of human rights violation in the forefront of society’s and international consciousnesses, and for too long the opposition has been impotent.

Yours faithfully,
Dennis Wiggins