Gail Alexander
There should be a return to the former process for the appointment of a Police Commissioner and Deputy Commissioners where the Police Service Commission (PolSC) recommends suitable persons to the Prime Minister for the positions, with the Prime Minister having a veto.
Also, consideration should be given to changing the POlSC to the Protective Services Commission and expanding its mandate to include Prison, Fire and the Municipal Police Service.
The National Advisory Committee on Constitutional Reform also recommended that no public service employee be favoured or prejudiced because they support a particular political party or cause.
The Committee noted that politicians, by way of Parliament debate and approval by the majority, are allowed to interfere with the appointment of members to thePolSC and this undermines its integrity and independence.
On the appointment of a Police Commissioner and Deputy Commissioners, the report noted that the PolSC requires special consideration because its operation has been subjected to constitutional amendment which delegated to the Police Commissioner the power of appointment, transfer, promotion, and discipline in ranks belowDeputy Commissioner, removed the Prime Minister’s veto over the appointment of the CoP and Deputy CoP, and inserted the Parliament into the approval process of persons appointed to those posts.
The Committee said appointments by Service Commissions are not and have never been subject to Parliamentary oversight or approval.
“However, in respect of the PolSC, the process for so doing inserted the office of the President, who is required to receive the merit list of persons selected and nominated by the PolCS for appointments as CoP and Deputy CoP and to transmit a notification regarding each person nominated to Parliament for affirmative resolution.”
The PolSC may make the appointment only after such resolution
The report added: “This process for selecting and appointing a Commissioner and Deputy Commissioners has proved cumbersome and prejudicial to candidates whose names come before Parliament and may be rejected with unwarranted reputational consequences. In addition, the current system fails to encourage and ensure that the most talented candidates apply and are nominated.
“There have been perceptions of political interference in the PolSC’s work. The Committee proposes a clear delineation of roles and the adoption of a protocol that promotes consultation without compromising the PolSC’s independence and the Government’s overarching responsibilities for national security and the safety of citizens.
“There is considerable reason to abandon the current process of Parliament’s intervention and restore trust in the work of the PolSC. Parliament is not a barrier to perceptions of political interference in any process, and its intervention didn’t serve to mitigate such risk other than to harm the reputations of nominees and politicise the process.”
The Committee suggested reverting to the previous process where the PolSC recommends suitable persons to the Prime Minister with the Prime Minister having a veto.
The report stated that the CoP and others like the Solicitor General are so directly concerned with the formulation of policy and supervision of its implementation “that they must be acceptable to the political chiefs with whom they must have a close working relationship.”
“This does permit some measure of political influence in purely public service appointments but is necessary on purely practical grounds. The Prime Minister should inform the Police Service Commission of the reason for any veto. For the same reasons, the Committee also recommends reverting to the previous method of appointment of the Police Service Commission.”
The Committee recommended that the PolSC evaluate the current system to establish mitigating factors, including compensation, that prevent applications from qualified recruits from among the best talent within T&T, the Caricom region, and the diaspora.