Dear Editor,
Once more the question of the promotions in the police force are being hindered because of the reported non-existence of the Police Service Commission.
Actually I find it hard to believe those who pose as an alternative administration could be so indifferent to how such critical governance procedures are ignored. One does not get the impression that sufficient attention has been paid to the non-functioning, and even non-existence, of the Police Service Commission, and the culpability therefor.
Hopefully the following text of Article 210 of the Constitution may ring a bell relating to the Opposition Leader’s responsibility.
“210
“(1) The Police Service Commission shall consist of –
(a) a Chairman appointed by the President acting after meaningful consultation with the Leader of the Opposition from among members appointed under subparagraph (c);
(b) the Chairman of the Public Service Commission;
(c) four members appointed by the President upon nomination by the National Assembly after it has consulted such bodies as appear to it to represent the majority of the members of the Police Force and any such body it deems fit:
“Provided that a person should be disqualified for appointment as a member of the Commission if he is a public officer.
“(2) Subject to the provisions of the next following paragraph, the office of an appointed member of the Police Service Commission shall become vacant at the expiration of three years from the date of his appointment or at such earlier time as may be specified in the instrument by which he was appointed.
“(3) The provisions of article 225 (which relate to removal from office) shall apply to the office of an appointed member of the Police Service Commission. In the case of an appointed member other than the Chairman, the prescribed authority for the purposes of paragraph (4) of that article shall be the Prime Minister or the Chairman and for the purposes of paragraph (6) of that article shall be the Chairman. In the case of the Chairman the prescribed authority for the purposes of paragraphs (4) and (6) of article 225 shall be the Prime Minister.
“(4) If the office of an appointed member of the Police Service Commission is vacant or if the holder thereof is for any reason unable to perform the functions of his office, the President, acting after meaningful consultation with the Leader of the Opposition, may appoint a person who is qualified to be appointed as a member of the Commission to act in that office, any person so appointed shall, subject to the provisions of paragraph (3), continue to act until a person has been appointed to the office in which he is acting and has assumed the functions thereof or as the case may be, until the holder thereof resumes those functions.
“(5) A person shall not, while he holds or is acting in the office of an appointed member of the Police Service Commission or within a period of three years commencing with the date on which he last held or acted in that office, be eligible for appointment to or to act in any public office.”
It is simply incredible that the opposition which revels in criticisms of defaults of the proposition would not see itself as conspiratorially delinquent in allowing the non-functionality of the Police Service Commission. The former’s soundbites are becoming increasingly hollow.
Yours faithfully,
E B John