By D. Alissa Trotz
Alissa Trotz is Editor of the In the Diaspora Column
It is three weeks since the public learned, via a report first carried in Kaieteur News, of 23 year old Colwyn Harding’s hospitalization with severe internal injuries that were allegedly caused by police savagery. According to the Stabroek News report of a few days ago, Cecil Kennard, Chairman of the Police Complaints Authority (PCA), hoped to send the case file to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), where the decision would be made on what legal action to take against the police officers implicated in the assault.
The public cannot be faulted for having grave concerns about how these shocking allegations have been handled, and for the questions that remain. The constable who was identified as sexually assaulting Colwyn Harding with a baton has apparently been placed under close arrest, but what of the officers who were at the station that night and who have since been transferred from Timehri police station; what disciplinary and legal actions will they possibly face? What of the prison officers who assaulted Colwyn Harding, in full view of witnesses, as he lay in a hospital bed? Have they been relieved of their duties pending an investigation, and does the case file address this most recent violence? What guarantees are being made to ensure the safety and security of Colwyn Harding and his family, especially if charges are to be laid? Other disturbing reports have come to light as witnesses have come forward, including the alleged police assault on a pregnant young woman. Whether the case file addresses all of these issues will only be known when the DPP makes a recommendation, but will the full results of the investigation be made public?
And then there are the official responses, which can only be described as callous, defensive and dismissive. Responding to a comment that Mr. Harding may be suffering from septicemia as a result of his injuries, Head of the Presidential Secretariat Dr. Roger Luncheon apparently felt it was appropriate, sufficient even, to reportedly remark that ‘God must be on his side.’ Doctors at the Georgetown Public Hospital gave a press conference with complete disregard for patient confidentiality. A day earlier, the Minister of Health shared selective and confidential medical information with Parliament while Mr. Harding remained chained to his hospital bed, apparently without any rights at all since it does not appear that his permission to disclose said medical records was either sought or granted. The Minister of Home Affairs rightly said that perhaps we should refrain from pronouncing on the case until all of the investigations are complete and all of the facts are in, but thought it okay to himself pronounce that from his reading of preliminary reports he believes “the case is very complicated as the allegations made are challengeable.” There is of course the separate but not insignificant matter of public confidence in the Office of Professional Responsibility (police investigating police, so who guards the guard?) and the Police Complaints Authority, understandable given that according to its own annual reports, the PCA received 238 written complaints in 2010 and recommended none for prosecution and one inquest, and received 241 written complaints in 2011 but recommended not a single prosecution or inquest. The President said that his government is against torture and that he supports an independent investigation, which begs the question, why did his government not immediately respond when the news first broke, with a forceful denunciation of torture and the ordering of an independent inquiry into the allegations? President Ramotar went on to accuse the media of being irresponsible and of having an agenda, when were it not for the media, this story might never have come to light in the first place. The United Nations Development Programme’s 2012 Caribbean Human Development Report ‘Human Development and the Shift to Better Citizen Security,’ concluded that “an alert press and organized human rights groups focused on police misconduct” are indispensable to ensuring “robust systems of police accountability.”
This is what a humane, decent response looks like: immediately coming out to express horror at the allegations; reaffirming a zero-tolerance approach to police brutality and ordering of an independent investigation into the specific allegations, including a full medical examination of Colwyn Harding and the young woman who also alleged that she was physically assaulted at the hands of the police; ensuring the safety of all those who come forward as witnesses; a promise to take swift action should the allegations be proven; recognizing the importance of public confidence in the police; a visit to Colwyn Harding’s hospital bed or to his family. None of this means taking sides, or hanging people without a trial, to use President Ramotar’s statement on the matter, but it reassures the survivors, their families, supporters and the public that these allegations will be taken seriously, an important matter where just four years ago a teenager had his genitals set alight by police (and where just in the past week another teenager has come forward alleging that he was raped by three police officers in Georgetown).
Sadly, in Guyana today even this can be dismissed as unrealistic or somehow partial, so let’s look at what happened in a sister country. Less than two weeks ago, a 27 year old young man, Nakiea Jackson, was fatally shot by police in Orange Villa, Jamaica, who claimed that they were in pursuit of a robbery suspect and were forced to fire when the man pointed a firearm in their direction. Four days later the Police Commissioner, National Security Minister Peter Bunting and Member of Parliament for the area visited with residents, where in a report by the Jamaican Observer of January 23, Bunting said that “we have assured the residents that the incident will be thoroughly investigated. INDECOM (Independent Commission of Investigations) has processed the scene; there will be no intimidation of anyone who wants to give statements to INDECOM.” At a press briefing one day later, Bunting noted that “the Administration views the issue of extra-judicial killings with the gravest concern and is committed to the police being accountable for their actions, and…every use of lethal force must be independently investigated, explained and justified.” According to the Jamaica Gleaner of January 24, just for this year alone INDECOM has already been asked to investigate possible security forces involvement in 14 killings of civilians. This is not a new issue, and as sociology lecturer and social justice activist Horace Levy remarked to me, Minister Bunting’s remarks have been met with “much skepticism…[which] is understandable, given the level of murder, the ineffectiveness of the police because of their methods, and the failure of the Minister and the state to carve out a new path.” In a letter published in the Jamaican press, Levy observed that that there are tentative indications that the Minister is considering a model of policing that integrates ‘community development and social projects,’ so that Bunting’s statements and actions give cause for cautious optimism at the moment. Without diminishing the very real challenges of tackling this horrific violence, what stands out here is the professional way in which the Jamaican Ministry of National Security (equivalent to our Ministry of Home Affairs) responded, in sharp contrast to the various irresponsible, unprofessional and lackluster statements from officials in Guyana.
Those more familiar with Jamaica also stress the importance of community mobilization and vigilance in ensuring accountability from the security forces and the government. They identify groups and broad-based networks like Jamaicans for Justice and the Peace Management Initiative. They also point to even more local responses, like the residents of Orange Villa who, in the aftermath of the shooting that took young Jackson’s life, set up fiery roadblocks in the community demanding justice. In other words, the Jamaican government’s response must also been seen in the context of increasing demands from society for change.
Back to Guyana, where just last week brave Corentyne residents also took to the
streets. Fed up with the crime in their community, they accused the police of incompetence and even of being possibly involved. By the end of the week the Police Commissioner and other high-level government officials had held meetings with residents to reassure them that their concerns were being treated with the utmost seriousness. As a moving letter to the press by Wintress White and a sober and excellent column by Iana Seales have noted, the people of Corentyne are to be applauded for publicly drawing attention to their deep sense of insecurity. But the official response reveals how in Guyana, divisions shape official interpretations of and responses to public outrage. It is difficult not to miss the fact that less than 24 hours after the Corentyne protests, Minister Clement Rohee would issue a public statement to the effect that he had suggested a complete transfer of police officers from the area, whereas it took close to ten days for the Ministry of Home Affairs to issue a lukewarm statement on the Colwyn Harding issue. The Police Commissioner would travel to Berbice to visit with residents and assure them that they are a priority, but it appears he has not even made an effort to meet with Colwyn Harding or his family. As Seales concludes, “The Corentyne unrest was about people holding government and law enforcement to account for their role as the lead authority and protector of our rights and property. The problems they face are widespread across the country but rather than use this struggle to communicate zero tolerance against crime and violence in our communities, some in our leadership including the Minister and the Commissioner decided to taint it by not only acting in a partisan manner but boldly telling us about it.” One can perhaps be forgiven for also seeing this as a belated and hopefully not ad hoc reaction to a constituency that can no longer be taken for granted and that is speaking out, because if such concerns were treated with utmost seriousness from day one, the people of Corentyne would not have been subject to such high levels of robbery, piracy at sea and other forms of violence over the years.
According to the 2012 UNDP Caribbean Human Development Report, security institutions across the Caribbean region are in crisis. In a 2010 opinion survey carried out in Guyana, the police force ranked 14th in response to a question about levels of trust in 15 institutions. Just last week, the People’s National Congress (Reform) said that every act of police torture or shooting over the last 20 years should be investigated, an important move but one that unsurprisingly in our divided Guyana does not go far enough. Frankly, our post-independence arrangements never altered the role of the police in a colonial society, and so any such investigation should go back at least forty years (covering both the PNC as well as PPP/C’s time in office) if we are to really effect a transformation of the security forces and build public confidence.
Engagement from below is essential. Unlike in Jamaica, we have no broad based anti-violence citizen initiatives like Jamaicans for Justice or the Peace Management Initiative. The alleged torture that Colwyn Harding suffered at the hands of police has prompted outrage and statements from individuals as well as a wide array of organizations (women’s, labour, private sector, sexuality rights, human rights, labour). Might we hope that this is a start, a commitment to speak up and speak out, whether it is Corentyne or Timehri, and to not let ourselves be divided in our responses? It seems that this is precisely what is needed if we are to make any headway in establishing public confidence in both the security forces and the ability of the Government to act promptly, professionally, impartially and in a non-partisan manner.
