(Trinidad Express) President Paula-Mae Weekes is maintaining she did not wilfully violate any provision of the Constitution and has not misbehaved in public office.
The President finally broke her silence on the fiasco surrounding the appointment of a Police Commissioner in a paid advertisement in yesterday’s Sunday Express in which she revealed that the Police Service Commission (PolSC) delivered an Order of Merit List for a substantive Police Commissioner on August 11, 2021, but withdrew it on the same day.
The statement offered no explanation as to what triggered the withdrawal of the list but the President added she will not address the question of who came to the Office of the President (OTP).
The President said at present she has no list before her.
“I confirm that an Order of Merit List in respect of the Commissioner of Police was delivered on August 11, 2021 to the OTP and withdrawn almost immediately thereafter that day,” she stated.
“I therefore had no list from which a Notification could issue. To date no other list has since been submitted. The OTP has been advised that the recruitment and selection process for the Office of Commissioner of Police has not yet been completed,” she said.
She defended her office, stating that there was no political interference or breach of the separation of powers.
Last Thursday, Opposition Leader Kamla Persad-Bissessar filed a motion in the Parliament pursuant to Section 36 of the Constitution seeking the establishment of a tribunal to investigate the removal of the President in respect of the collapse of the PolSC and the aborted process of appointing a Police Commissioner.
In her statement, President Weekes indicated that she had been waiting the High Court ruling in the matter between Ravi Balgobin Maharaj versus the Attorney General before making her statement.
She noted the Court declared that the appointment of Gary Griffith to act as Commissioner of Police from August 18, 2021 was void and contrary to Section 123 of the Constitution.
‘Not the practice of this office’
Former PolSC member Roger Kawalsingh in an e-mail to the then-PolSC chair had questioned why the Merit List for Police Commissioner was not submitted to the President.
He stated that the PolSC chair visited the President and “there was an occurrence and information obtained which excited the suspicion of the chair and caused her such discomfort that it was not possible to deliver the list”.
Kawalsingh stated that, based on the nature of the information, from whom and how the information came, there will be a perception of interference.
Regarding this, President Weekes said: “As much as I respect many of those in the legal, political and public spheres who demanded it, I will not address the question of who came to the Office of the President (OTP) and met or spoke to whom; that is not the practice of this office.”
She added that she does not consider it helpful in analysing the issues she dealt with in her statement.
The President noted that the former PoLSC initiated an enquiry into matters surrounding the Issuance of Firearm Users Licences (FUL). Retired judge Stanley John was hired to investigate.
The President asked the public to consider several questions, including what should be done if the PolSC receives information.
“If there exists apparently credible Information that might impact deliberations on an important constitutional function of the PoLSC should it be brought to the Commission’s attention? Or should the Commission be left in the dark?” she asked.
Other questions posed by the President are: “Is merely providing information to a Commission interference in its operations? Would receiving unsolicited information, without more, compromise the PoLSC’s independence? Does the source of the information matter?”
Dangerous assumptions
The President noted that many statements in the public domain have used the terms “political interference”, “clandestine”, “secret, “subversion of the Constitution”, without any apparent consideration of the need for confidentiality or privacy in sensitive circumstances.
“Our Constitution provides that the party in power nominates the President, often leading to the groundless, unfortunate and dangerous assumption that the President is a tool of that party,” she stated.
She noted that the Constitution envisages a non-partisan, apolitical President who not only performs the routine duties and functions of office, but can be trusted to, where necessary and appropriate, make decisions in the national interest; of course, within the Constitution and the law.
“I assure the nation that neither the OTP nor I participated in, allowed or encouraged any attempted or actual improper interference, influence or breach of the principle of separation of powers in the operation of the PoLSC in the matter of the Commissioner of Police,” she stated.
“I did not receive instructions or suggestions from any individual, nor did I give any to the PoLSC. I certainly did not wilfully violate any provision of the Constitution nor have I behaved in a way that could lead one reasonably to conclude that I have brought the OTP into hatred, ridicule or contempt or endangered the security of the State,” she added.
Commissioner, she must await a list of nominees submitted by a newly constituted PoLSC.
She noted that, as of now, there are three Notifications with the Clerk of the House of Representatives and one ongoing consultation with the Prime Minister and the Opposition Leader.
And the OTP continues to work assiduously to identify a fifth nominee, she added.
