Seeking to put to rest criticism over the scuttling of a UK-funded £3M security reform project, the government on Thursday released details of the proposals for implementation that both sides blame for the collapse but they shed little light on what exactly was the deal breaker.
In multi-page ads published in the national daily newspapers (see yesterday’s edition), the Government of Guyana (GoG) released details of a mutual agreement reached at the end of last year, and the subsequent submissions on the design for an implementation plan. Cabinet Secretary Dr Roger Luncheon has said the April 2009 submission by the UK threatened to encroach on Guyana’s sovereignty, while the British contend that the government’s proposal was for a “fundamentally different” programme, focused on police modernisation rather than the holistic reform originally requested. The release of the documents on the negotiations was in keeping with a promise by Luncheon, who has faced severe criticism from the opposition after the announced withdrawal of assistance.
The Security Sector reform programme for Guyana was developed with the assistance of the UK government between October 2006 and December 2007. The assistance involved a series of scoping and design missions with the African Security Sector Network, resulting in the submission of the security sector reform action plan, intended as the basis for a programme agreement. Stabroek News was informed that the plan was drafted by, among others, consultants drawn from South Africa, Nigeria and India, who were sensitive to the need not only for national participation but national ownership of the process.
The agreement reached by both sides included the Terms of Reference (TOR) for the National Security Secretariat, which was set up at the end of last year to support the Office of the President (OP) in all activities related to formulation, coordination and implementation of security sector reform. The TOR puts emphasis on “national ownership and leadership” of the reform process, saying that they are essential for effective security and justice development. In this vein, it identified improving the capacity of the GoG as critical. It added that what needs to be achieved is a comprehensive security sector reform implementation plan that has a properly sequenced design, characterised by its coordination and consideration of larger national frameworks. Further, it said an effective and properly mandated National Security Secretariat would be a key element in supporting the government’s efforts in such national strategic planning on security issues, including assessment, policy-making, planning, legislative changes and budget setting. (Major General (Ret) Michael Artherly was appointed as Project Coordinator for the Security Sector Reform at the start of year, with responsibility for managing the Secretariat under the overall leadership of the Secretary to the Defence Board-currently Dr Luncheon.)
The UK’s proposal for implementation, submitted in April, is aimed at building a sustainable foundation for improving national security and reducing serious crime in Guyana by 2011. To this end, it speaks to the need for implementation of a national security plan and the security sector reform and to increase public confidence in government’s response to security issues. It explained that developing a national security policy as well as establishing management and oversight structures and building capacity within the police force are all crucial to responding to serious crime. The proposal sets out almost three dozen activities with detailed milestones and specific timelines within which they are to be met, up until 2011. Towards the development of the security reform strategy, the targets include a series of public stakeholder consultations and training to strengthen parliamentary oversight, throughout the lifetime of the project. These are aimed at building government capacity for managing the reforms, developing a national security policy and a reform strategy, establishing accountability and oversight of the security sector, strengthening the professional standards and service delivery of the police force and establishing an effective structure for managing the reform project. The proposal lists specific activities to be carried out in each area, ranging from the recruitment of staff, the design of legislative strategies, parliamentary programmes to public consultations and workshops.
The proposal also identifies potential risks to these processes, including “weak” government and police force commitment to and ownership of holistic reform; the unwillingness of civil society to participate in consultations and/or consultations that are not inclusive and therefore compromised; and a lack of commitment by Members of Parliament (MPs) to their oversight role.
However, Luncheon has criticised the UK’s proposal, saying it deviated from the basic architecture of management agreed to by both countries last December. He said the management proposed by the UK is inconsistent with other UK Department for International Development (DFID) projects. “…They have stressed country ownership and their respect for national sovereignty [but] I walked from this process when I saw the outrageous, insulting document that they sent me in April,” he said, referring to the UK submission. According to him, Guyana has “no apologies” to make for its position. “…We would have to say Guyana owes no apologies when it comes to its entrenched positions of the inviolability of our national sovereignty,” he declared, adding that “some obviously feel that Guyana cannot manage a grant of that magnitude even though our history over the years since 1992 is replete with successful management of external funding of much, much greater size and complexity.”
Meanwhile, the UK has said that last proposal from the GoG suggested a focus on police modernisation, rather than on holistic security sector reform, which led to the decision to withdraw its offer of assistance.
The GoG submission, dated June 2009, addresses four primary areas: oversight of security sector reform; policy formulation; institutional capacity building for the police force; and programme management.
The government’s proposal, however, lays much of its emphasis on institutional capacity building and support for the police force, with a timeline between 2009 and 2010.
In the area of oversight, the government’s proposal identifies the establishment of the National Security Secretariat, the Parliamentary Oversight Standing Commit-tee on the Security Sector and the adoption of a communications and awareness strategy and public consultations to target civil society.
Policy formulation calls for a security sector strategy solely within the remit of the Defence Board. Building institutional capacity of the police force, meanwhile, would rest on having a trained firearm and specialised tactical team, trained crime investigation, the expansion of forensic capabilities of the force and the creation of rapid response capabilities.
