Dear Editor,
Never in the history of the Guyana Police Force (GPF) or for that matter the security sector have there been so many reforms and efforts at modernization and real change. The facts attest to this reality.
These changes are not imaginary, nor far-fetched. They can be tested and proven. Neither can the skimpish reporting, rubbishing or throwing cold water on these reforms and the significance they hold for the security architecture of Guyana erase or diminish the truth.
The abandonment of journalistic ethics and fair and balanced reporting which the Kaieteur News and Stabroek News threw out the window a long time ago only serves to demonstrate that both newspapers feed at the same trough filled with pro-opposition infested and anti-government propaganda.
The editorial policy of these two newspapers is clear for all to see; publish nothing to make the PPP look good, publish everything to make the PPP look bad; publish little to make the opposition look bad; publish everything to make the opposition look good. Take the Stabroek News, for example; its bottom line is to assert its “independence.” Inews is slowly but inexorably moving in that direction. It is all about gaining credibility, and in Guyana the way to establish one’s credibility is to be critical of government and to slant stories in such a way to ensure that they are not favourable to government or the PPP and to give a discernable degree of positive prominence to the opposition. This is the road enabling ‘media independence’ and ‘credibility’ in Guyana.
In sum, to speak well of the government, its programmes and policies is to be a mouthpiece of the government or a soup-drinker to the PPP. The intellectual skunks want no part in this. This is the extent to which our journalism standards have fallen in Guyana.
The Stabroek News relishes writing about the ‘lack of democracy’ at the local government level in the same way the Kaieteur News has fun writing about ‘accountability and transparency.’
But to whom are they themselves accountable? Do they practise internal democracy and good governance in their respective editorial boardrooms?
Mr Granger would be lying between his teeth were he to deny that the ongoing reforms in the security sector have had and will continue to have far-reaching effects throughout the law enforcement agencies. This is probably what he fears most and that is why he wants to torpedo the reform and modernization process, currently underway. Or is it the eventual withering away of the ‘kith and kin’ syndrome that he morbidly fears?
Mr Granger can only feign ignorance about these reforms in exchange for political expediency, but in the final analysis, facts and the truth are there for all those who have eyes to see and ears to hear. He who is politically deaf and blind in the realm of Guyana’s politics is bound to end up in Jurassic Park.
Vibrant, open and healthy political competition is a sine qua non for a thriving democracy, especially for a new democracy that is less than twenty-five years old. The re-invention of government and its established institutions to facilitate good governance in the interest of the populace is a vital and compelling necessity for the PPP, as a ruling party.
I have always maintained that security, call it national security or public safety and security, is a work in progress; anyone who argues that a state of perfection and or a sustainable comfort zone is attainable once an abundance of human resources, technological applications, adequate remuneration and incentives, recruitment and training of law enforcement officers are available is living in a fool’s paradise. Ferguson, Missouri is a case in point. This is not to say that we must not strive to attain such levels so long as we can afford them.
Mr Granger must say publicly whether during his tenure as Commander of the GDF under Burnham and later, as National Security Adviser to Hoyte, the security situation in Guyana was better than it is today and whether the police and Defence Force had everything they wanted. Further, he must do the comparative analysis to show what the budgetary allocations for the GDF and the GPF were then, and what they are now.
Mr Granger must give concrete details to show whether the GDF and the GPF were better out-fitted under his command compared to how they are outfitted now.
The reality is that the current reforms and changes are manifested in the following:
- establishment of a state-of-the-art forensic laboratory;
- establishment of a Police Officers Training College;
- rehabilitation/remodelling of eighteen police stations;
- establishment of seventeen police outposts;
- computerization of Guyana Police Force headquarters, Traffic headquarters and CID headquarters, Central Passport & Immigration Office and forty-four other police stations;
- establishment of computer centres at all police divisions and at force headquarters;
- establishment of CCTV cameras throughout the city;
- establishment of a National Intelligence Centre;
- introduction of the new machine readable passport;
- procurement of hundreds of vehicles for the GPF;
- establishment of the integrated crime information system;
- establishment of a crime and social observatory;
- establishment of a holding centre for juveniles;
- establishment of the electronic crime reporting system;
- establishment of civilian staffed strategic management departments at the Guyana Police Force, Guyana Prison Service and Ministry of Home Affairs to assist in the implementation of their respective strategic plans;
- establishment of a Serious Organized Crime Unit (SOCU);
- establishment of the Guyana National Computer Incident Response Team (to address cyber crimes);
- passage of the Interception of Communication Act;
- passage of fifty laws in the National Assembly to strengthen law enforcement;
- establishment of a several civilian composed boards to institute internal administrative reforms within the Guyana Prison Service and Guyana Fire Service;
- establishment of an investigating arm of the Police Complaints Authority;
- increase in the fixed establishment of the Guyana Police Force from 3,410 to 4,956;
- strengthening and expanding middle management in the Guyana Police Force by increasing the number of police cadets from ten to fifty;
- strengthening the Marine Wing of the Guyana Police Force through capacity building, procurement of a floating base, a work boat and a number of additional patrol boats as well as provision of specialized training for police ranks;
- establishment of a SWAT team at the Guyana Police Force;
- expansion and improved equipping of the community policing organization;
- establishment of traffic wardens;
- expansion of neighbourhood police;
- expansion of station management committees;
- establishment of houses of justice;
- successful implementation of Citizen Security Programme;
- modernization of the Ministry of Home Affairs.
Mr Granger and company must be grinding their teeth with envy at the scale and magnitude of these reforms and changes in the security sector initiated by the PPP/C administration since its assumption to office.
His unwillingness to support the establishment of the Parliamentary Oversight Committee of the Security Sector is a glaring indictment of his tongue in cheek, two-faced approach to security matters and by extension the security of the nation.
The deeper these reforms go vertically and horizontally, the more irreversible they will become with the inexorable march of history.
Yours faithfully,
Clement J Rohee
Minister
