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.

Sunday, May 18, 2025

Gary Griffith calls it “alarming” that the Stanley John report was presented to the National Security Council

by

1208 days ago
20220125
Former Commissioner of Police, Gary Griffith.

Former Commissioner of Police, Gary Griffith.

For­mer Com­mis­sion­er of Po­lice (CoP) Gary Grif­fith is ques­tion­ing why the re­tired Jus­tice Stan­ley John re­port was pre­sent­ed to the Na­tion­al Se­cu­ri­ty Coun­cil and de­scribed it as alarm­ing and of con­cern.

In fur­ther re­sponse to the leak­ing of the re­port, Grif­fith, on Tues­day, list­ed a num­ber of rea­sons he thinks as to why the re­port should not have been pre­sent­ed to the NSC in­clud­ing since it men­tioned the name of a Gov­ern­ment Min­is­ter.

He al­so not­ed that the re­port, be­cause, it went be­fore the NSC, in which a Gov­ern­ment Min­is­ter cur­rent­ly sits, places the life of a po­lice con­sta­ble, an in­for­mant, at risk. Grif­fith dis­closed that re­tired Jus­tice Stan­ley John, by let­ter to him dat­ed, Sep­tem­ber 18th, 2021, stat­ed, “I wish to re­it­er­ate that my re­mit does not in­volve an in­ves­ti­ga­tion in­to your good­self as CoP [Act­ing] nor to any po­lice of­fi­cer.” 

Fur­ther to this, ac­cord­ing to Grif­fith, “the Stan­ley John re­port was com­plet­ed and sub­mit­ted, ac­cord­ing to the Sun­day Ex­press, to the Po­lice Ser­vice Com­mis­sion, and ac­cord­ing to com­ments made by Min­is­ter of Na­tion­al Se­cu­ri­ty, Fitzger­ald Hinds, al­so sub­mit­ted to the Na­tion­al Se­cu­ri­ty Coun­cil.

“Grif­fith said the state­ment by Min­is­ter Hinds, con­firm­ing the doc­u­ment was sub­mit­ted to the Na­tion­al Se­cu­ri­ty Coun­cil (NSC) is “both alarm­ing and of con­cern. “He then list­ed a num­ber of rea­sons in­clud­ing: 

1.  I sub­mit­ted the name of a Min­is­ter, who cur­rent­ly sits on said Na­tion­al Se­cu­ri­ty Coun­cil, who has been in re­ceipt of a 5.56 firearm, and held same for over a pe­ri­od of one year, with­out pay­ment to the deal­er. 

2. Jus­tice John, by sub­mit­ting this re­port to the same Na­tion­al Se­cu­ri­ty Coun­cil up­on which said Min­is­ter sits, has es­sen­tial­ly ‘tipped’ off per­sons in con­tra­ven­tion of Sec­tion 51 of the Pro­ceeds of Crime Act.  

3. The act of sub­mit­ting a re­port with in­for­ma­tion di­rect­ly per­tain­ing to per­sons sit­ting on the Na­tion­al Se­cu­ri­ty Coun­cil, begs the ques­tion as to why was the re­port pre­sent­ed to the Na­tion­al Se­cu­ri­ty Coun­cil, with full knowl­edge that it con­tained in­for­ma­tion rel­a­tive to mem­bers of said body? 

4. Jus­tice John’s re­port, ac­cord­ing to the ar­ti­cle in the Sun­day Ex­press high­light­ed a Po­lice Con­sta­ble, who made claims that he was ap­proached by Se­nior Po­lice Of­fi­cers to en­gaged in acts of cor­rup­tion.

This re­port, hav­ing made its way to the Na­tion­al Se­cu­ri­ty Coun­cil [ which was NOT the body that ini­tial­ly en­gaged Jus­tice John], then, find­ing its way on­to the front pages of the Sun­day Ex­press, has now es­sen­tial­ly threat­ened to place the life of said in­for­mant at risk.

Such a cal­lous, cal­cu­lat­ed and odi­ous un­der­tak­ing as hav­ing a re­port such as this, leaked from one of two State bod­ies has con­tributed to the po­ten­tial for detri­ment to the life and liveli­hood of an in­di­vid­ual. 

5. Ad­di­tion­al­ly, when did the re­mit of Jus­tice John’s re­view change? And un­der whose au­thor­i­ty and in­struc­tion?  

6. Con­sid­er­ing the prin­ci­ple of Nat­ur­al Jus­tice has been ig­nored [I was not giv­en the cour­tesy of a re­sponse, de­fence, nor copy of said re­port], since, ac­cord­ing to Sun­day Ex­press, Jus­tice John has stat­ed that I broke the law by ‘breach­ing the firearms act’.  

Grif­fith dis­closed that he will pur­sue le­gal re­dress for the un­der­tak­ing of a ju­di­cial re­view and to ob­tain a copy of the said re­port, for fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion.

Re­porter; Rhon­dor Dowlat


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored