Promotions within the Guyana Fire Service (GFS) could become the next case engaging the High Court as several officers are objecting to being removed from a preferment list due to alleged “disciplinary infractions” for which they were punished years earlier.
About half of the 30 men and women removed from the list have instruct-ed their attorney, Eusi Anderson, to write to acting Fire Chief Kalamu-deen Edoo directing that he issue to the Minister of Home Affairs the list of all officers who have passed the necessary examinations and are therefore eligible for promotions or face a “constitutional action for discrimination”. The Fire Chief has been given until Monday August 23 to correct the issue.
Edoo, however, says that no promotion list currently exists.
“There is nobody removed from the list. We did an exam and we are going through the exam right now. There is no promotion yet. Nobody ain’t get promotion. There is no list as yet,” he told this newspaper when contacted.
Edoo also said that he was not in receipt of the lawyer’s letter, dated August 20, 2021.
Stabroek News under-stands that vacancies within the service are filled on an ‘as needed” basis, with those eligible being required to undertake written, oral and practical examinations. Once offi-cers have passed these examinations, promotions proceed based on seniority.
Late last year, vacancies at new fire stations at Lethem, Mahdia, Maba-ruma, Melanie Damishana and the fireboat service, opened and examinations were conducted in December, 2020.
Following the examinations the panel led by then Deputy Chief Fire Officer Edoo submitted the results to Fire Chief Gentle, who prepared and circulated on January 29, 2021 the results of sub-officers, section leaders and leading firemen. This list has been seen by Stabroek News.
Contacted for comment, Gentle, who retired in February, declined to speak on the matter.
It is not clear what happened over the next six months but on July 29, the Principal Personnel Officer of the Ministry of Home Affairs, writing on behalf of Permanent Secretary Mae Thomas, advised Edoo that a decision had been taken to have the promotions list “revised,” omitting an attached list of named persons.
The reason given in the memo seen by this news-paper was correspondence received on July 22 related to “disciplinary infractions against persons eligible for promotion.”
Notably some of the officers on the list have served for in excess of 20 years and according to their lawyer’s letter do not have active infractions. In fact, it says the infractions have already been heard, determined and disciplinary action instituted.
“Your attention ought not to escape the principles of natural justice, fairness and due process…none of my clients can be removed from any list without a hearing, without due process and without natural justice being strictly adhered to. They have done an alleged crime and are paying for it twice…that is patently illegal and cannot with-stand even the slightest judicial scrutiny,” Anderson stated in his letter to Edoo.
Anderson lists in the correspondence the infractions for which each officer was previously disciplined, including one female officer who object-ed to being addressed by a half dressed male officer.
“A section leader spoke to her with his shirt and pants open displaying his naked chest and underwear including briefs. She told him that he cannot speak to her in that condition. He charged her with improper conduct He found her guilty and her salary was deducted. This incident happened in 2017, she was charged in 2018 and later promoted in 2019,” the letter says of this incident.
In another instance, three officers were charged and disciplined in relation to an incident yet only one of those officers was struck from the list.
“Both pled guilty to neglect of duty and improper conduct charges from the same incident…yet it appears that these women have had their identical disciplinary infraction from the identical incident airbrushed to their benefit,” the lawyer notes.
He includes for comparison a list of seven other officers who have had infractions more serious than those of his clients but who continue to be considered for promotion.
In one case, a fireman who is alleged to have physically assaulted a colleague and was subject to a criminal investigation by the Guyana Police Force remains under consideration.
