On Friday, September 9th, the Ministry of Home Affairs issued a statement on the conclusion of the government’s engagement of the Regional Security System (RSS) to evaluate/review corruption allegations that had been made on August 11 by Detective Sergeant Dion Bascom about the Guyana Police Force’s (GPF) handling of the probe into the murder of Ricardo Fagundes on March 21 last year.
As a result of the allegations, the ministry said it had sought investigative services and the RSS facilitated the request. A former Detective Chief Inspector of the Metropolitan Police Service, Serious and Organised Crime Command (United Kingdom) was deputed to provide assistance.
The ministry’s statement said that the main objectives of the report sought from the RSS were:
• To determine whether the GPF has effectively investigated the unlawful killing/homicide of Ricardo Fagundes.
• To determine whether there is any evidence to support any wrongdoing by D/ Supt. Mitchell Caesar and Insp. Nigel Stephens of the GPF as alleged by Sergeant Dion Bascom.
• To review the investigation of the Fagundes case by the GPF and any actions taken by the investigating officers.
The ministry’s statement then related what it said were key findings. These included:
•The bribery allegations made by Sergeant Bascom against the GPF, namely, that Detective Supt. Caesar and Inspector Stephens attempted to cover up the unlawful killing/homicide of Fagundes “were hearsay having no provenance”.
• Sgt. Bascom has alleged that the GPF has tried to cover-up the unlawful killing/homicide of Fagundes. However, there is evidence that the GPF has diligently sought Regional and International assistance in solving this case.
The actual terms of reference of the RSS intervention were never made public by the ministry. However, it must be emphasised that it would be impossible for the RSS intervention to properly arrive at the conclusions listed by the ministry on Friday without having spoken to Sergeant Bascom, the man who in these circumstances would have to be considered a whistleblower. What has been described as “hearsay” still has to be tested. Moreover, the conclusion which the ministry said that the RSS arrived at would have been wholly based on the investigator’s engagement with the GPF, some of whose senior members have been accused by Detective Bascom. The RSS probe would have therefore relied on statements from those who could have possibly tried to cover any trail of incrimination.
In defending the police’s handling of the Fagundes murder probe, the ministry’s statement on Friday rather amateurishly, baldly stated that there is evidence that the “GPF has diligently sought Regional and International assistance in solving this case”. That is certainly no credible defence of the investigation. More than a year later the crime remains unsolved and there are ample grounds for arguing that sufficient attention was not paid to significant clues such as the origin and ownership of the getaway vehicle.
A significant section of the ministry’s release on Friday was dedicated to undermining the credibility of Sergeant Bascom. That in itself is evidence of the ministry’s disinterest in an evenhanded approach in this matter. The Ministry noted that he had been arrested at a drug house, had engaged in behaviour contrary to the Cyber Crime Act of 2018, had been living rent-free in the quarters of an Essequibo businessman and gold trader, had been providing private security services to said businessman and had leaked information about ongoing investigations.
It may well be that Sergeant Bascom is culpable of obliquity in these matters. However that in itself does not negate any of the claims that he had made. Furthermore, one would have thought that both the ministry and the RSS investigator would have recognised that Sergeant Bascom should be given an opportunity to defend the breaches he was accused of.
As it is, the ministry’s statement on Friday has not settled a single concern about Sergeant Bascom’s allegations about the Fagundes murder probe. What is pervasive in the press release is that there is a further attempt by the ministry to stage manage the process and to limit the fallout from the allegations. This is typical of PPP/C governments. Without a credible resolution to these allegations, the GPF will continue to suffer from the continuous public loss of confidence in its ability to conduct itself professionally. The ministry’s unvarnished antipathy towards Detective Bascom also undermines the valuable role that whistleblowers play in democratic societies and which function is catered for under the Protected Disclosures Act.
To determine whether the Barbados-based RSS adequately discharged its task or was used by the government to deliver a desired outcome, the public must see the full report minus whatever redactions would be deemed permissible for security reasons. The public doesn’t need the ministry to interpret for it.
