Any action under the Constitution against Commissioner of Police, Henry Greene who has moved to the High Court to block rape charges against him will now have to be discussed by Cabinet, says Attorney-General Anil Nandlall.
The AG had told Stabroek News that given the nature of the allegations against Greene, there must be a recommendation from the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to charge him before there is any constitutional sanction. The DPP has since advised that a charge of rape be instituted against the Top Cop. However, Greene successfully secured a High Court order barring the police from instituting a charge and the matter comes up for a hearing next Monday.
Questioned about any action against Greene now that the DPP has recommended that the Top Cop be charged with rape, Nandlall told Stabroek News yesterday that “that will be an issue that will have to be addressed by Cabinet.” He directed further questions to Home Affairs Minister, Clement Rohee.
In his court filing, Greene said that he had consensual sex with the woman. This admission, Head of the Presidential Secretariat Dr. Roger Luncheon later told reporters, concerns government and in time could attract disciplinary action.
During an interview with Stabroek News last month, Nandlall had said that given the nature of the allegations against Greene, there must be a recommendation from the DPP to charge him before there is any constitutional sanction. The provisions of Article 225 of the Constitution cater for a tribunal to be appointed to determine the matter.
Nandlall had said that the nature of the allegations would be one of the considerations that would see criminal charges being brought prior to an application of the provisions of Article 225.
Nandlall noted that the grounds for removal of office holders under Article 225 are the inability to discharge the function of the office, whether arising from infirmity of body or mind or any other cause whatsoever, or for misbehaviour. Having regard to the nature of the allegations against the Commissioner, he said it is “excruciatingly plain” that for the purpose of the Article, the applicable ground would be misbehaviour.
But, he had added, that to adhere to the principles of fairness, natural justice and the constitutional guarantee of the presumption of innocence, an investigation was necessary to determine whether or not there is a basis for the allegation. “It is only when there is a finding of sufficient evidence of alleged misbehaviour by the investigations, that the question of removal from office arises in order to catalyse Article 225 into operation,” he had said.
