Senior Reporter
derek.achong@guardian.co.tt
A businessman from Penal has been given the green light to sue Police Commissioner Erla Harewood-Christopher over her delay in deciding his application for a firearm user’s licence (FUL).
On Monday, High Court Judge Margaret Mohammed granted leave to the businessman, whose name was withheld due to personal safety concerns raised by his lawyers, to pursue a judicial review lawsuit over the delay.
In his court filings obtained by Guardian Media, the businessman’s lawyers, Keron Ramkhalwhan, Shalini Sankar, and Annesia Gunness, claimed that he made his application for a FUL in January 2019.
He allegedly sought to follow up on the progress of his application several times before he was informed that his file could not be located in October 2020. Two months later, he reapplied based on advice given by officers assigned to the Firearms Permit Unit.
They claimed that in February 2021, the T&T Police Service (TTPS) conducted an investigation in relation to his application, with an officer visiting their client’s businesses and properties.
“The intended applicant was notified by the said investigator that he had no objection to him being granted a provisional licence and had so recommended,” Gunness said.
They claimed that he subsequently sought another update and was told that the file was awaiting a decision from the police commissioner. After he received no response, the businessman made an application under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
“There has been no response to the FOIA request to date,” Gunness said.
While the businessman’s lawyers accepted that under the Firearms Act, there is no time limit prescribed for the Police Commissioner to render a decision, it should be done without unreasonable delay based on the provisions of the Interpretation and Judicial Review Acts.
“Delay, where it arises, does not accord with good administration and is justifiably recognised as legitimate grounds to warrant judicial review,” Gunness said.
“Administrative decisions by administrative bodies directly impact upon the rights of citizens and must therefore be exercised in a way that is fair, just, and proportionate,” she added.
Through the lawsuit, the businessman is seeking a series of declarations over the delay and an order compelling Harewood-Christopher to make a decision within 21 days.
The matter is scheduled to come up for case management on December 5.
In March, Justice Nadia Kangaloo ordered Harewood-Christopher to decide on 17 FUL applications that had been pending for two years or more, as she upheld a similar case to the one brought by the businessman. Her decision in their case came almost two months after she upheld an identical lawsuit from 33 applicants.
In late March, Justice Frank Seepersad upheld a similar case from a Tobago businessman over an almost three-year delay in deciding his FUL application.
In his judgment, Justice Seepersad stated that deciding on FUL applications is a core function of Harewood-Christopher’s job. “It is simply outrageous that a sitting commissioner would elect to adopt a, ‘well, I have plenty work to do’ stance in defence of the delay that has transpired in this case,” Justice Seepersad said.
“To suggest that one core function is more important than another is a classic ‘cop-out’ stance which does not instil any confidence as to the office holder’s capacity or capability to discharge the required statutory obligations,” he added.
Dealing with Harewood-Christopher’s claim that the delay was partially due to over 25,000 pending applications, Justice Seepersad pointed out that she failed to adduce evidence of the efficiency of the application process.
Commenting on the case at the time, Prime Minister Dr Keith Rowley stated that the “excuses” attributed to Harewood-Christopher were presented by a member of her legal team and not her directly.
“I have been taken to court on many occasions as Prime Minister. Nobody is going to court representing me on any affidavit unless I know what is being said there,” he said. He also pointed out that the case demonstrated the need for the State to have competent legal representatives.
Rowley also noted that the judges did not have the power to make national policy, including on firearms.
“Activist judges who speak as though they could make the policy and guide public servants what to do, I am saying that the government’s policy ought to be respected. The Government has no policy to arm the population like Gary Griffith has been doing and advocating in the political arena. A PNM Government has a different approach,” he added.