Minister of State Joseph Harmon last Thursday said that any dispute between Commissioner of Police Seelall Persaud and former acting Commissioner David Ramnarine should have and could have been handled internally.
After returning from an extended leave, Persaud challenged promotions that were made by Ramnarine as he felt that they did not go through the appropriate legal process.
His objection to the process was that Ramnarine was not appointed by the President of Guyana to act in the capacity and, therefore, he could not make the promotions. As a result, Persaud wrote to the respective administration officers for the ranks’ promotions to be rescinded. Ramnarine, a Deputy Commissioner, had been appointed to act by the Minister of Public Security.
The existence and contents of these letters were reported in the media and became the subject of public discourse, which is a state of affairs that Harmon called less than ideal.
“It is important that these matters not occur in the public space, in the media, that they be dealt with in another way. The issues that came into the public space are issues that could have been dealt with internally…,” Harmon told reporters at this week’s post-Cabinet press briefing last Thursday.
He explained that such a relationship should exist at that level of an organisation that if a subordinate has done something which requires a reprimand, it can be done internally.
“In fact, the President said he prefers that you have public praise and private reprimand; so, that if something like that is done, the person is brought in and you say, ‘Man what is it you’ve done here? Let us correct it,’” the minister explained.
Stabroek News had previously reported Minister of Public Security Khemraj Ramjattan as saying that he has sought legal advice from Attorney General Basil Williams on the matter.
According to sources Persaud objected to Ramnarine’s actions, while citing the constitutional provisions to support his argument that the promotions should be rescinded. The Constitution, however, contradicts his arguments.
Article 211 of the Constitution of Guyana states that “The Commissioner of Police and every Deputy Commissioner of Police shall be appointed by the President acting after consultation with the Police Service Commission.”
It adds, “If the office of Commissioner of Police is vacant or if the holder thereof is for any reason unable to perform the functions of his office, a person may be appointed to act in that office and the provisions of the preceding paragraph shall apply to such an appointment as they apply to the appointment of a person to hold that office; and any person appointed to act in the office of Commissioner of Police shall, subject to the provisions of paragraphs (3) and (4), continue to act until a person has been appointed to that office and has assumed the functions thereof or, as the case may be, until the holder thereof resumes those functions.(3) Subject to the provisions of the next following paragraph, the Commissioner of Police shall vacate his office when he attains such age as may be prescribed by Parliament.”
Article 232 of the Constitution also says that unless it is otherwise provided or required by the context, “A reference to power to make appointments to any office shall be construed as including a reference to power to make appointments on promotion and transfer and to confirm appointments and to power to appoint a person to act in or perform the functions of that office at any time when the office is vacant or the holder thereof is unable (whether by reason of absence or infirmity of mind or body or any other cause) to perform the functions of that office; and (b) a reference to the holder of an office by the term designated his office shall be construed as including a reference to any person for the time being lawfully acting in or performing the functions of that office.”
It says also that the validity of the performance made by the person acting in the specified capacity cannot be questioned in court.
“Where by this Constitution any person is directed, or power is conferred on any person or authority to appoint or elect a person, to perform the functions of an office if the holder thereof is unable to perform those functions, the validity of any performance of those functions by the person so directed or of any appointment or election made in exercise of that power shall not be called into question in any court on the ground that the holder of the office was not or is not unable to perform the functions of the office,” the constitution reads.
