The Guyana Defence Force (GDF) yesterday stated that its attempts to remove a former rank from the University of Guyana (UG) campus, while he was in a class, were justified according to the Defence Act.
The University of Guyana Student Society (UGSS), had issued a press statement on Thursday expressing concern that GDF ranks had entered the George Washington Lecture Theatre (GWLT) on February 12 and 13 in an attempt to detain a soldier who they said had been Absent Without Leave (AWOL).
The UGSS stated that on the second occasion the men, two of whom were in military fatigues, were prevented from entering the lecture hall by its president, who told them that a more professional option should have been employed to carry out their objective.
The GDF officials reportedly failed to apprehend the man they described as “Mr Rodney” on both occasions.
The GDF has since been condemned and criticized by many who believe that there must have been a more professional alternative that could have been followed in order to carry out whatever task they were sent to dispatch. Ganesh Mahipaul, President of the UGSS, suggested that at the very least, the UG administration should have been contacted and involved.
However, yesterday the force stated that its actions were guided by the Defence Act, which is its authority on arrest and punishment for military offences of desertion. The GDF, in a statement, explained that each officer and/or rank who enlists in the army is subject to its laws, in accordance with the Defence Act Chapter 15.01 of the Guyana Constitution.
This Act, the force said, gives the institution the legal right to arrest, detain, and punish such offenders as it deems necessary.
Sections 47 and 48 of the Act, in particular, guide the force’s actions as it relates to dealing with ranks and officers who would have deserted or gone AWOL.
Under Section 47 “every person who deserts or persuades any person subject to service law to desert, shall, on conviction or by court martial, be liable to imprisonment or any less punishment for more than two years.”
Section 48 addresses the act of being AWOL and essentially suggests the same punishment. Once found guilty by a court martial, the deserter is liable to imprisonment.
The force also stated that Section 178 (1) of the Act stipulates that “any police officer may arrest, without a warrant, any person whom he has reasonable cause to suspect of being an officer of soldier of the force who has deserted or is absent without leave.”
Section 178 (2) further stipulates “if a police officer is not available any officer of soldier of the force or any other person may arrest without warrant any person” whom he has reasonable reason to suspect of being AWOL.
The force, in its statement, maintained that it remains committed to the professional execution of all its standard operating procedures and the proper treatment of its ranks.
