JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Wednesday, February 19, 2025

Kamla: Why was gun amnesty put in SoE regulations?

by

36 days ago
20250114
Opposition Leader Kamla Persad-Bissessar makes a contribution during yesterday’s debate on the State of Emergency.

Opposition Leader Kamla Persad-Bissessar makes a contribution during yesterday’s debate on the State of Emergency.

NICOLE DRAYTON

Se­nior Re­porter/Pro­duc­er

akash.sama­roo@cnc3.co.tt

Op­po­si­tion Leader Kam­la Per­sad-Bisses­sar is still ex­press­ing grave con­cern about the con­tin­ued ex­is­tence of a gun amnesty clause in the State of Emer­gency (SoE) reg­u­la­tions, de­spite Na­tion­al Se­cu­ri­ty Min­is­ter Fitzger­ald Hinds say­ing it is not some­thing Gov­ern­ment is pur­su­ing.

Per­sad-Bisses­sar yes­ter­day de­mand­ed that Gov­ern­ment ex­plain why it was in­clud­ed in the reg­u­la­tions if it was not meant to be op­er­a­tionalised.

Sec­tion 11 of the reg­u­la­tion states, “No per­son who sur­ren­ders any firearm, am­mu­ni­tion or ex­plo­sive dur­ing any pe­ri­od that is pre­scribed, and oth­er­wise in ac­cor­dance with an Or­der to sur­ren­der, shall be pros­e­cut­ed un­der the Firearms Act or reg­u­la­tion for il­le­gal­ly pur­chas­ing, ac­quir­ing or pos­sess­ing such firearm, am­mu­ni­tion or ex­plo­sive pri­or to the time of such sur­ren­der or at that time.”

“Reg­u­la­tion 11 is un­con­sti­tu­tion­al,” Per­sad-Bisses­sar said dur­ing de­bate to ex­tend the SoE by three months.

She said while the reg­u­la­tions give cer­tain “dra­con­ian pow­ers” to law en­force­ment, “you can­not go now and in­ter­fere with, or tres­pass on pow­ers giv­en con­sti­tu­tion­al­ly to cer­tain of­fice hold­ers.”

“Reg­u­la­tion 11 seeks to do ex­act­ly that, to tres­pass up­on the pow­ers of the in­de­pen­dent of­fice of the DPP (Di­rec­tor of Pub­lic Pros­e­cu­tions),” she added.

Per­sad-Bisses­sar said the DPP has ex­clu­sive au­thor­i­ty to in­sti­tute, con­tin­ue or dis­con­tin­ue crim­i­nal pro­ceed­ings un­der Sec­tion 90 of the Con­sti­tu­tion. She said Reg­u­la­tion 11 di­rect­ly con­tra­dicts that.

“This is very con­cern­ing be­cause Sec­tion 90 is not just a pro­vi­sion in our Con­sti­tu­tion, it is a deeply en­trenched pro­vi­sion in our Con­sti­tu­tion. It can­not be tak­en away by way of a sim­ple ma­jor­i­ty, nor can it be tak­en away by emer­gency pow­ers reg­u­la­tions, that can­not hap­pen,” she said, as her Op­po­si­tion MPs thumped their desks in ap­proval.

“So, by grant­i­ng im­mu­ni­ty by reg­u­la­tion 11, Gov­ern­ment is over­step­ping its bounds and in­ter­fer­ing with the DPPs pow­ers,” she con­tin­ued.

Per­sad-Bisses­sar said this rais­es se­ri­ous ques­tions about the sep­a­ra­tion of pow­ers. She said Reg­u­la­tion 11 al­so un­der­mines pub­lic safe­ty.

“By grant­i­ng im­mu­ni­ty to in­di­vid­u­als who pos­sess il­le­gal firearms, Reg­u­la­tion 11 jeop­ar­dis­es na­tion­al se­cu­ri­ty, it con­tra­dicts the pub­lic in­ter­est in pros­e­cut­ing of­fend­ers, and this can lead to an in­crease in gun vi­o­lence and cre­ate a cli­mate of im­puni­ty for those who vi­o­late firearm laws,” she ex­plained.

Speak­ing on a ra­dio pro­gramme on Sun­day, Na­tion­al Se­cu­ri­ty Min­is­ter Hinds said gun amnesties have not worked in the past.

“First of all, let me tell you that the Gov­ern­ment’s po­si­tion as stat­ed has not been one for at­tempts at amnesty. We be­lieve that our law en­force­ment agen­cies have the law, the Con­sti­tu­tion, the man­pow­er, the re­sources with in­tel­li­gence to go and find the guns,” Hinds said.

Per­sad-Bisses­sar ac­knowl­edged yes­ter­day that Gov­ern­ment Min­is­ters have said the gun amnesty pol­i­cy was not op­er­a­tional. But look­ing at Stu­art Young, who was act­ing At­tor­ney Gen­er­al dur­ing the de­c­la­ra­tion of the SoE, she said, “Go back and read the law and tell us why did you put this in place when this is clear­ly a tres­pass of the role and func­tion of the DPP.

“How did it get in there? Port-of-Spain North/St Ann’s West, how did you put that reg­u­la­tion there? And I ask again, is there any se­ri­ous in­ves­ti­ga­tion in­to any Gov­ern­ment of­fi­cial hold­ing a pro­hib­it­ed weapon and is this a bligh to al­low that of­fi­cial to hand it in and dis­ap­pear?”

Mean­while, Barataria/San Juan MP Sad­dam Ho­sein, who con­tributed ear­li­er in the de­bate, said the SoE is sim­ply a tem­po­rary sup­pres­sion of crime for po­lit­i­cal gain.

“When this SoE is over, what you think is go­ing to hap­pen? When all those gang lead­ers out on the street, what is go­ing to hap­pen?” he asked.

Ho­sein said Calvin “Tyson” Lee, a re­put­ed gang leader whose ac­tiv­i­ties, ac­cord­ing to me­dia re­ports, trig­gered the SoE, is cur­rent­ly un­der house ar­rest. How­ev­er, he ques­tioned what would hap­pen to him on the ex­pi­ra­tion of the SoE.

“When 6ixx Dan or Tyson house ar­rest is over, what hap­pens? Be­cause this SoE won’t be in ef­fect for over six months. We are go­ing to cause an even more ag­gra­vat­ed sit­u­a­tion, you have to deal with the root caus­es of crime,” he said.

Ho­sein asked why the po­lice had not laid any se­ri­ous charges against gang lead­ers yet.

“You can’t just lock up peo­ple for three months and say we did well. What they are try­ing to do is sup­press crime for this very short pe­ri­od just so they can go on a po­lit­i­cal cam­paign, mount a plat­form and say we dealt with crime,” Ho­sein said.

The ex­ten­sion of the SoE was even­tu­al­ly agreed to by a unan­i­mous vote at the end of the de­bate.


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored