-sector employs 5,398 guards
The National Assembly last evening passed long-in-the-works legislation for the licensing and regulation of private security services.
Home Affairs Minister Clement Rohee piloted the Private Security Services Bill 2009 through its final stages, while emphasising that it would lift the standards of the private services through training while ensuring security guards’ welfare, in keeping with labour laws. The Bill was passed with minor amendments during a sitting of the National Assembly that was boycotted by the main opposition party, PNCR-1G. AFC MP Sheila Holder and GAP-ROAR MP Everall Franklin were the only opposition members present.
According to the Bill’s explanatory note, the legislation seeks to provide for the regulation and control of private security services in Guyana and related matters. There was previously no law regulating the industry, which, according to the Bill, has seen a growing demand for streamlining and regulating the business of private security agencies for providing better organised and disciplined quality security services and for ensuring the efficiency and welfare of security guards.
The Minister noted that the legislation was the product of consultations with security firms, which currently number 18, although there are also 76 companies with internal security arrangements. He said too that there are 5,398 security guards attached to various firms-a figure that is larger than the membership of the police force. He revealed that there are 719 security guards in every 100,000 people, as compared with a rate of 319 policemen in every 100,000 people. Additionally, Rohee said that more than half of all security firms are reporting growth of their services, linked to a rise in criminal activities as well as the implementation of more sophisticated security services. It is estimated that $4.6B is spent annually on security services.
Rohee situated the evolution of the legislation in the realm of security sector reform and argued that such a process should not be limited to the public sector but rather, also include the private sector. He referred to it as a “twin-track” approach, while adding that it would also seek to secure a better working relationship between the police force and security firms. Given the “important role” the security services play in the protection of company, he said it was impossible to allow their expansion without rules and procedures.
Meanwhile, Franklin argued that the private security services seemed to really be growing in proportion to the deficiencies of the police force-a development that he said was not confined to Guyana. However, while supportive of the legislation he was critical of the creation of a new “bureaucracy,” explaining that functions that would now become the responsibility of the police force were already within the realm of the Labour Ministry and the Revenue Authority. He also felt that the Bill seemed to favour large-scale operations and he worried it could threaten entrepreneurship, citing the $50,000 fee for licensing. As an alternative he suggested that consideration be given to the size of the workforce in the determination of a fee for a licence. He was also critical of the absence of specific information as it related to instances where applicants for licences could be deemed ineligible.
The Bill provides for the establishment of a Controlling Authority-identified as the Police Commissioner-that would be responsible for licensing and approvals and monitoring the activities and effectiveness of private security agencies and guards. The Minister is, however, identified as the Licensing Authority, according to the Bill. Under the provisions, any person or body or association of persons wishing to establish a private security agency should first be registered as a company under the Companies Act 1991. After 90 days from the date of the commencement of the new law, no person or company would be allowed to commence or continue to carry on the business of any private security service without obtaining a licence granted by the Controlling Authority. Where an agency is in existence before the commencement of the law, it would be given six months to apply for a licence and if the Controlling Authority refuses the request the applicant would be given six months to cease operations. The Controlling Authority would also be vested with the power to cancel a licence, in which case an agency would be ordered to cease operations.
The Bill also sets out provisions to disqualify persons from consideration for the grant or renewal of licences, including conviction for any indictable offence connected with the company or conviction in or out of the country with a sentence of two years imprisonment. Additionally, dismissal or removal from government service on grounds of misconduct involving acts of dishonesty or violence; and keeping links with any group banned under any law in any country on account of activities deemed as posing a threat to national security or public order are also cited as disqualifiers.
Under the provisions of the Bill, private security agencies would be required to ensure that the security guards and supervisors recruited and employed fulfil educations qualifications and physical standards to be set out in regulations. Also, they would be required to ensure that employees receive training and professional skills as prescribed by regulations. The agencies would also be required to have their own disciplinary codes to govern the conduct of guards and supervisors.
