Dear Editor,
During the afternoon of September 16, 2020, I had a meeting with President Mohammed Irfaan Ali at the Office of the President, Shiv Chanderpaul Drive, Georgetown, Guyana. I went to that meeting in my capacity as Chairman of the Police Service Commission. The only persons in that meeting were the President and I. During the course of the meeting the President made certain inappropriate requests in relation to the promotion of specific individuals in the Guyana Police Force.
I informed the President of the criteria for promotions, which included the provision that ranks with pending disciplinary matters cannot be considered for promotion. He was also told that promotions are made by the Police Service Commission and not only the Chairman.
On December 23, 2020, the Police Service Commission met and shortlisted ranks to be further considered for promotion. That shortlist did not include ranks who had pending disciplinary matters, including some that the President indicated he wanted promoted.
During the very night of December 23, 2020, I had a telephone conversation with the President in relation to the promotion shortlist. The President was very upset over the fact that specific ranks, whom he preferred, were not on the shortlist. I was alarmed that the President seemed to know who the shortlisted ranks were, as that document was confidential and was for further consideration by the Commission. It was later revealed in an affidavit by Senior Superintendent Calvin Brutus that the promotion shortlist was “leaked to him by a confidential source at the Police Service Commission”.
What followed thereafter was a well-orchestrated attempt by the government, aided by some self-serving police ranks, to dismantle the Police Service Commission:
a. On December 24, 2020, the acting Commissioner of Police was instructed to institute criminal charges against several ranks, some of whom were shortlisted for promotion. It was evident that that was done to influence the Police Service Commission to not promote those ranks.
b. On December 30, 2020, Senior Superintendent Calvin Brutus, Super-intendent Shivpersaud Bacchus, Deputy Superintendent Rabindra Stanley, Woman Assistant Superintendent Shavon Jupiter and Inspector Prem Narine filed a Fixed Date Application in the High Court to stop the promotion, which, incidentally, had not been made. All of those ranks had pending disciplinary matters before the Commission at that time, and therefore were not eligible to be considered for promotion.
c. On May 19, 2021, Mr. Clinton Conway, a member of the Police Service Commission, along with other retired and serving police officers were arrested on a trumped up charged of conspiracy to commit fraud. I was also charged jointly with the said persons with the same offence.
d. The very day, May 19, 2021, Prime Minister Mark Anthony Phillips, MSS, sent letters to Mr. Conway and I, demanding that we show cause why he should not advise the President that we should be removed from the Police Service Commission as a result of the charge that was instituted.
e. On June 1, 2021, the Prime Minister sent letters to all members of the Police Service Commission for us to show cause why he should not advise the President to have us removed from office. The reason given this time was that the Commission had joined with Member of Parliament Ganesh Mahipaul in the challenge to the Fiscal Management and Accountability Act. It is apposite to note that other Service Commissions also joined in the challenge. However, the members of the Police Service Commis-sion were singled out and asked to show cause why they should not be removed from office.
f. On June 16, 2021, each member of the Police Service Commission receiv-ed a letter from the President informing us that we were suspended from the Police Service Commission with immediate effect.
g. The suspension was deemed unlawful and was challenged in the High Court.
During the court battle which ensued an attempt was made to portray the Police Commission as “rogue”, and I as being untruthful in my accurate recount of events leading up to the suspension, including the meeting with the President on September, 16, 2020.
Towards this portrayal, Prime Minister Mark Anthony Phillips, MSS, swore to an affidavit and said, that “I deny the averments contained in paragraph 22 of the Applicant’s Affidavit in Support and contend that the allegations made therein are scandalous, contain inadmissible hearsay and are unsubstantiated and oppressive. The Applicant is put to strict proof thereof. In particular, I am advised by the Honourable Attorney General Mr. Mohabir Anil Nandlall SC, MP, and do verily believe that:
(i) no meeting was requested, arranged or took place with Mr. Paul Slowe, whether through an intermediary and/or otherwise, as alleged at paragraph 22 (2) and (3) and/ or at all”.
That was only one of the glaring falsehoods contained in the affidavit. The meeting referred to in paragraph 22 of my affidavit was my meeting with the President on the afternoon of September 16, 2020.
On May 31, 2021, I held a virtual press conference in which I outlined all that took place from the date of the meeting, and the reasons I believed the charge was instituted against me and the others.
The very night, May 31, 2021, President Mohamed Irfaan Ali issued a statement to the media in which he stated, among other things, that “Mr. Slowe, like other independent commissioners, the judiciary, and I had a meeting. At that meeting, I raised various concerns with him that was brought to my attention without prejudice…It is therefore not only opportunistic but a total lie that my meeting with Mr. Slowe was to exercise any influence…My meeting with Mr. Slowe was within the first few months of my presidency”. The meeting to which the President referred was the meeting on September 16, 2020, at the Office of the President.
From the above it is pellucid that the affidavit sworn to by Prime Minister Mark Anthony Phillips, MSS, in which he stated that no meeting took place between the president and I, is demonstrably false. The President admitted on three occasion in the statement released on May 31, 2021, that the meeting did take place.
Having regards to the definition of perjury it is my considered opinion that in swearing to the affidavit and saying that no meeting took place as stated in my affidavit, among other easily provable falsehoods, Prime Minister Anthony Mark Phillip, MSS, committed the criminal offence of perjury.
The Rule of Law is “a principle under which all persons, institutions, and entities are accountable to laws that are: Publicly promulgated. Equally enforced. Independently adjudicated”. If the Rule of Law exists in Guyana Prime Minister Mark Anthony Phillips, MSS, will be made to answer for allegedly committing the criminal offence of perjury.
This case will reveal whether George Orwell’s allegorical novel, Animal Farm, in which it is stated that “all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others”, is what obtains in Guyana.
Time will tell!
Yours faithfully,
Paul Slowe CCH, DSM, Assistant Commissioner of Police (Retired). Former Chairman of the Police Service Commission.
