Dear Editor,
Over the past week I have been carefully surfing both the Guyana Chronicle and Kaieteur News hoping to find published the Commission of Inquiry’s report on the deadly prison riot of 3rd March 2016. For me, It would be to allow Guyanese both at home and in the diaspora an opportunity to analyze and share their views on the content of the report before the government responds, if indeed we value citizens’ participation in decision-making. Since I have no way of being sure whether the government plans to make public the same, I will take this opportunity to comment on the little the man in the street has been told by way of the print media.
The Kaieteur News and the Chronicle of 2nd June inform us that the report recommends some attention be paid to increasing the amount of social programmes at the institution. Secondly, the commission saw overcrowding as a major problem and a contributing factor to what occurred on 3rd March.
Editor, in my letter published in the Stabroek News of 2nd May 2016, I dealt with this notion that it was overcrowding at the Georgetown prison that led to the tragedy of 3rd March, and therefore see no use in again commenting on this issue. The suggestion by the commission that there is need for more social programmes at the prisons is an interesting observation. We are told that recidivism is above 80% at the Georgetown prison. This, it seems, suggests that emphasis should first be directed at making the existing programmes effective before considering additional ones. Also I hope the report suggests what these added programmes should be aimed at achieving.
On accepting the report, the President is said to have stated “starting this year, prison officers will be trained in the police academy, so we expect that that will raise their level of competence.” Sorry, I do not share the President’s optimism. What competence? If we must judge the police academy by the behaviour of so many police officers what type of prison workers are we to expect? The Guyana police prior to and since independence have always operated under suspicion of abuse of authority and power. The have always behaved as a ‘force.’ They have always shown enthusiasm for going after those who commit street crimes. Citizens of poor communities have always been harassed and threatened even when protesting police disrespectful behaviour and harassment in their communities. During the rule of Jadgeo and later Ramotar, these tendencies of the police grew worse. Who can forget the young man who had his genitals set on fire by the police? (Unbelievably, I have been told that both of the policemen involved were promoted during the Ramotar government). Now citizens, especially from poor communities, are supposed to feel comfortable knowing that the factory which produced such police officers will be responsible for turning out prison officers.
Editor, there is a reason why today in the developed world officers working in prisons are referred to as ‘correctional officers’ and not ‘prison warders.’ There is also a reason why prisons are referred to as ‘correctional institutions.’ This new designation and term reflect present thinking and values. Today there are two contrasting philosophies that inform thinking in this matter. The first stresses individual responsibility for crime, and here great store is placed on punishment and retribution for criminal behaviour. For those who embrace this philosophy the purpose of the police is repression , “to contain disruptive tendencies.” The other philosophy stresses the social environment as the cause of crime and those who embrace this view favour rehabilitation. They recognize that whether we like it or not, the vast majority of persons incarcerated will be freed at some time and therefore there is a need for concentration on helping the incarcerated to be able to reintegrate. Now this latter philosophy is particularly applicable to our prison officers (correctional officers). Is the police academy organized for this new emphasis?
What is needed is for the University of Guyana to commence a diploma course in Correction/Rehabilitation. The course should seek to cater for the needs of those working in all our correctional institutions – juvenile and criminal. Emphasis should be on keeping the class small, with supervisory staff from the above institutions being the first to benefit from this training. It would be the responsibility of these senior staff to do some in-service training for junior staff on successfully completing their academic training. Junior staff marked for promotion should also be sent on this course with the understanding that their promotion would be tied to their successfully completing the programme. Assuming that UG still offers students pursuing the degree in Sociology an optional course in Criminal Justice, it should not be difficult to organize Corrections/Rehabilitation as a full diploma course.
Meanwhile I repeat my encouragement to the government ‒ if indeed prison reform is urgently needed ‒ that the Commission of Inquiry’s report be published as early as possible.
Yours faithfully,
Claudius Prince
