Senior Reporter
derek.achong@guardian.co.tt
A police officer facing corruption charges has lost his lawsuit challenging the decision to bypass him for promotion.
In a recent judgment, High Court Judge Devindra Rampersad dismissed Inspector David Subero’s case against the Commissioner of Police over the decision not to promote him while criminal charges against him were pending.
Justice Rampersad found that the decision could not be faulted.
“It was not illegal, unlawful or contrary to law; it was not in breach of the principles of natural justice or procedural fairness; it was not an abuse of power; it was not in breach of any legitimate expectation; and it was not unreasonable,” he said.
Subero claimed that a decision on December 22, 2020, to promote colleagues ranked both above and below him on a merit list for promotion to Assistant Superintendent (ASP) was unlawful.
Almost a month before the promotions, Subero and a police constable were jointly charged with misbehaviour in public office and two corruption offences. They were accused of accepting a $5,000 bribe from a couple in exchange for not prosecuting them for allegedly operating gambling machines without a licence at their Fyzabad restaurant.
The then Police Commissioner approved Subero’s suspension based on the charges several weeks before the promotion exercise. However, Subero learned of the decision a week after the promotions because of difficulties serving him with the notice.
In his judgment, Rampersad noted that neither the Police Service Act nor its regulations required the Commissioner to automatically promote officers based on their position on a merit list.
“Placement on an Order of Merit List therefore confers eligibility for promotion and not a right to it,” he said.
Rampersad also rejected Subero’s claim that no official policy barred the promotion of suspended officers facing criminal charges at the time.
“The absence of a written prohibition does not convert a discretionary power into a duty, and the Commissioner did not require a written policy in order to decline to exercise the discretion in the claimant’s favour,” he said.
Finding no breach of natural justice or procedural fairness, Rampersad noted that the TTPS uniformly applied the practice of promoting suspended officers only after their suspensions were lifted.
He also said Subero had been told his promotion would be reconsidered if the charges were resolved in his favour.
Rampersad rejected Subero’s claims of constitutional breaches because the Office of the Attorney General was not initially named as a party to the case.
He ordered Subero to pay the legal costs incurred by the TTPS in defending the lawsuit.
Subero was represented by Navindra Ramnanan and Ricky Pandohee. Krysta Jalim, Janique Mitchell and Herschell Barker represented the Police Commissioner’s Office.
