Acting Commissioner of Police Seelall Persaud today vigorously defended the promotion of the two police officers who tortured a teen boy, saying the ranks were exonerated and that “life must go on.”
Speaking for the first time on the promotions, Persaud argued that even though the High Court had found the ranks liable for the torture, they were not given a chance to represent themselves in the case and therefore natural justice did not prevail.
Several persons have expressed shock and dismay at the promotion of Sergeant Narine Lall to the rank of Inspector and Constable Mohanram Dolai to the rank of Corporal. Last week, the Rights of the Child Commission (RCC), in a strongly-worded statement, asked for the promotions to be rescinded, while saying they send the wrong message to the public.
But Persaud, who would have directly promoted Dolai and been the one responsible for the inclusion of Lall’s name on the list sent to the Police Service Commission (PSC) for promotion, stood his ground yesterday when faced with questions from members of the media at the end of the opening session of the Guyana Defence Force’s Officers’ conference at Camp Ayanganna.
In 2009, Narine and Dolai poured methylated spirits on the teen’s genitals and set him alight while he was in the custody of the Leonora Police Station as part of a murder investigation.
An investigation by the police force’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) had found that the two policemen injured and tortured the teen. Later, in awarding $6.5M compensation, after the filing of a civil suit, High Court Judge Roxane George noted that the ranks were liable for torture.
Following the OPR report, police surgeon Dr Mahendra Chand, who the report said treated the injured teen following the torture, was disciplined for his participation. Several others, including the then ‘D’ Division Commander Paulette Morrison, were disciplined. Morrison was demoted and transferred. She has since retired from the force.
‘We have a policy’
However, Persaud yesterday said the force has a policy when disciplining ranks and explained that those who have been charged and convicted are dismissed. If they are exonerated, then they remain members of the force, he added.
In the case of Lall and Dolai, the criminal charges were dismissed after the witnesses failed to attend court.
Consequences
Pressed about the heinous act committed by the two officers and whether they faced the consequences of their actions, Persaud stood his ground. “You know, we have people going to prison for hideous offences. We can’t reject them when they come back into society. It is the same principle that applies, life must go on,” he said.
He later pointed out that there is nothing on the record of the ranks indicating that they were either convicted or that any disciplinary actions were taken against them. Asked whether the force investigated the allegation that the witnesses were paid not to attend the trial, Persaud said no such allegation was made but “actually what happened the man himself, the victim himself, did not appear in court.”
Persaud placed no weight on the High Court’s findings in the case, saying as far as he was concerned the ranks were unable to defend themselves and, therefore, were not afforded natural justice. He explained that in the High Court ranks were represented by the state and did not get the opportunity to represent themselves and if a disciplinary process was recommended they would have had a right to be heard, since that is natural justice.
“The ranks did not get the right to be heard; natural justice didn’t take place there. Everyone needs the right to be heard. We have several ex-members of the force who have sued the force… when they did not get the right to be heard and all of them were granted monetary awards and some were replaced into the force and so on. And there are written case laws, a whole lot, coming out of the same High Court,” he stressed.
Asked about the disparity between the two officers, who were found liable, being promoted and Morrison, who was the officer-in-charge at the station, being demoted, Persaud said: “I can’t recall but that would have gone through a disciplinary process that would have been based on the recommendation from our legal advisors, who would have been the DPP at the time.”
Responding to the call by RCC to rescind the promotions, Persaud said before that is considered policies have to be addressed “and if there are suggestions then fine, give them to us. The policy right now is if you are not convicted for—I use the word convicted—for a disciplinary offence in the force, you are eligible two years after for consideration of promotion.”
The RCC said the promotions will only serve to further “aggravate and entrench” international concerns about local police excesses, which were highlighted at the recent United Nations Human Rights Council Universal Periodic Review in Switzerland.
It was stated too that the promotion of the two ranks would undermine the process of reform and will aid in corroding the public’s faith in the police to effectively service and protection, actions which its mandate stipulates.
“Go read the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act. See what the principles that are enshrined in that Act [are] and come back with your argument,” Persaud added, when further pressed by this newspaper, which first reported on the promotions of the ranks.
In regard to the OPR finding the two ranks guilty of injuring the teenager, Persaud denied this, while stating that what happened instead was the office found evidence but the force worked on the advice of the DPP and a trial took place. “And it was at that trial they would or would not [be] found culpable,” he added.
Following objections to its decision to promote Lall, Chairman of the PSC Omesh Satyanand had said in defence of the decision that Lall had an unblemished record apart from the torture and he had pointed out that someone should not be punished indefinitely for a crime after already being punished. The punishment in Lall’s case was interdiction from duty and half month’s pay until the criminal case came to an end. He has not been found guilty of the crime as the criminal matter was thrown out after the boy and other witnesses failed to turn up to testify.
