A competent law enforcement official should
address the nation and give guarantees of police conduct
Posted January 19th. 2003 - Special Feature by David Hinds and Eusi Kwayana
We have removed from an earlier version of this statement some of our comments on the Good Hope affair, because the suspects are before the court. We welcome this development.
This letter argues:
a) That the criminal-political-drug violence has been mishandled;
b) That confidence in law enforcement has almost disappeared;
c) That pouncing down on a whole village is not modern law enforcement;
d) That cowboy tactics of collective punishment will continue to cause villagers to welcome armed criminals among them;
e) That some definite steps should be taken, as a stage may be reached when it is too late. Guyanese are caught up in a cycle.
It is defeating everybody; all "sides." Look at last week's events in Buxton-Friendship. The police admitted that because of new losses of innocent policemen, the Police Force resolved to act and carry out an operation in Buxton on January 8, 2003. The police did not act on the basis of detective work, but used mass intimidation and terror. No wanted men were named or taken. Innocent people were hurt and suffered in various ways.
Making Peter pay for Paul to impress the country leaves Peter with a sense of injustice, and lets Paul off. It doesn't work. The operation of January 8, 2003 was a show of strength good for unarmed civilians. We insist that such operations pose no problems for armed criminals. One was free to waylay the patrol minutes after and cause a tragedy.
These operations make the population feel targeted and win support for the gunmen. The late Village Father, Mr George Younge, had a creole proverb for it. "You can't ketch thief if you holla 'thief! thief me a come!" You don't catch a thief by shouting, 'Thief Thief, I am coming!' The police then raided again and women came out holding children and singing hymns.
Whatever form the demonstration took, it showed, in part, a sense of solidarity with the gunmen that many now see as their protectors. There was no information and, therefore, there were no suspects. It was not like the clean GDF Good Hope swoop. It was a fishing expedition. So all were treated as suspect, all the "unknown" gunmen and the 95 percent innocent people of the village. Next day passengers passing in mini buses were attacked and robbed on the public road. There were no police there. Wealthy people very seldom travel by mini bus, so the motive must be other than robbery. There is an agenda, which needs violence to go on and on.
This is the only explanation for some of the incidents. Robbery for money is easy to spot. Has not all this happened before? Must we go through it again and again, with new series of people being hurt and being killed? A government representative told a conference in Washington DC that "There is no crisis." They had better not ask for one, then. Because of this denial, the law enforcement people have not made one of those dramatic calls on the offenders and the nation, placing options before the offenders in everyone's hearing. They refuse to use available means to help turn the tide. A kidnapped man is still unaccounted for.
Gunmen in Buxton hold their own courts. They passed sentence on the Chesters for informing. A stranger killed Marlon Peters, according to press reports, also for "informing." The stranger was then killed. Yet the police have no information about either killing. There is the danger that guns will be used to settle private quarrels. Reflect. The Black Clothes executed Shaka Blair.
A private citizen charged Merai, who led the squad, with murder. The DPP dismissed the charge and later dismissed himself. Offences followed, with no suspects being arrested. Is this law enforcement? Where are the successors of crime sleuths of all races of the old police force? Where is the new Police Chief and who will choose his team? This situation cannot go on. As we have seen, the masterminds made Buxton their centre.
But we already knew the casualties would not be confined to Buxton. The target seems to be part of Region 4. Because it can contribute to alarm, we have held back from saying that the government has proved its failure to manage. The Good Hope incident where five men were alleged to be found with the most dangerous weapons and with subversive software tells the story. Evidence of a Preliminary Inquiry will not be published. Observers will have to attend the hearings.
In the USA and elsewhere some computer software is for the security forces only. Dr. Luncheon told that famous press conference after the Good Hope arrests that the GPF had similar software. He only raised more concerns. Such software can come from a foreign or domestic security department or from mafia-type underworld.
Those who comment on these situations, in Guyana at least, tend to omit the element of interaction or tit for tat. It is very deep in the psyche. Perhaps we who sign this letter are in the best moral and political position to condemn the gunmen in Buxton. This is because we did not fail to bring to public notice in 1998, through the courts, and with sworn and documentary evidence, the possession of dangerous firearms by an Enmore resident, known outside the courts to be a PPP activist.
WATCHPOST 4 also documented the letter from the Ministry of Finance granting duty free concessions to the Enmore Policing Group for the importation of arms and ammunition. The PNC had made that letter public and no one denied it. The fact that the Enmore citizen charged was let off in the face of published evidence would cause people on the opposite side to justify the presence of arms in Buxton.
We do not support that view and because of that we are isolated. However, the argument has a powerful appeal for the mass of people on the other side. The PPP should have known that rival gunrunners would arise and would use the Enmore issue to help justify all that they did. The government can make no fair argument against gunmen outside of its supporters' ranks. It placed itself in a weak moral partisan position. To them, these things do not matter politically.
The facts of the case apart, some people support a phantom group claiming that would be law enforcement by law encroachment. It is outright subversion of the law, unofficial privatisation of the state itself. The allegations against Benschop are vague up to this point.
It would have been better for him if they had found him with telescopic sights. He might have been on bail. There is a strange game being played. There is some unsigned agreement or understanding among important persons to let arms move freely. There is no arms factory in Buxton. Where did the arms come from? How did the arms get there?
Whose duty was it to prevent the transportation of illegal arms? Did they carry out this duty? Why not? Therefore, when a phantom group is caught red-handed at Good Hope, many in turn felt they had a right to be armed. One lesson we can learn from the late Mr. Desmond Hoyte's political behaviour is that he allowed a militant supporter of the PNC to face a capital charge. This was an important human rights example. The PPP until now has been doing the opposite. The prosecution of the Good Hope gang must be seen as a welcome change. We have no political clout, but we have our voices.
The WPA, the party with which we are associated, cannot go in and tell people what they should do, but can only send ideas to the parties in conflict and to the wider public. We do not speak here for the WPA, but because the party has historically been active in Buxton and because some people have asked us why the WPA does not play a more active role especially in Buxton, a few points about the party's limitations are useful.
We have not consulted outside ourselves, so the following is our own assessment
1. Since the March 2001 election the main body of opposition supporters feel that they must combine in one single push to achieve their goals. They will not tolerate at this point any competing policy.
2. The state of conflict is armed conflict. The WPA cannot supply or withdraw arms.
3. All violence, including domestic, is out of control.
4. There is a deep and basic distrust among villagers of what the police will do if the gunmen give up their arms. WPA can give no guarantees to either side and can settle none of these matters.
At this point all we can do is warn of greater danger and put our recommendations out in public.
We have always understood the political process and sincerely believe what we say here. Taxpayers are paying a government and security forces, yet arms have been piling up. What can the fair-minded expect the WPA to do at this stage? WPA has been calling for years for reconciliation, or coming together as equals. The majority saw us as people "sitting on the fence" or trying to get into government.
We never sat on any fence! Of course we do not want to be controlled by either major party. This attitude we see as reasonable and realistic. So all we can do is campaign for fairness. There are political times when this is all certain people can do.
It is not useless, but it cannot cause things to change quickly. Finally, we have no feeling against Indians or Africans for the way they voted at the last elections. Our representation is due mainly to Amerindians. We cannot now act as though we speak for the coastal masses. They have shown by their votes and their bodies what they want at the present time.
WPA lost its seat on Region 4 RDC, although Councillor Desmond Trotman was one of the most approachable and hardworking councillors there.
That is a fact of life. Here are a few practical recommendations on how we can get ourselves out of this mess:
1. A competent law enforcement official must go on TV and radio and address the nation and the gunmen and give guarantees of police conduct. This official must have authority and enjoy confidence.
The victim communities and households, passengers and others must have the protection of law enforcement. Beware of those who make it a crime for people to support a party of their choice. It can cut both ways. The law enforcement must give reassurances to non-offending citizens.
2. Appoint an official negotiating or bargaining team. Get off the high horse and save lives! The high horse is not galloping anyway. The team must declare that Guyana or Region 4 is not a cemetery.
3. Discuss with CARICOM and the Commonwealth and OAS ways of settlement and roles to be played. Many Guyanese have been peacekeepers in foreign trouble spots.
4. There should be an official date by which all persons with illegal weapons must turn them in without penalty for just having a firearm. Handing in of a firearm must not be used as evidence of guilt of crime. Such evidence must be independent.
5. People in affected villages, especially Buxton-Friendship, must be allowed to form policing groups, which now exist mainly in PPP strongholds. The members of all policing groups must take a public oath before the district magistrate. All policing groups must enjoy equal duties and facilities.
6. Obtain the necessary IADB financing for a renewed Guyana National Service, open to all, devoted to market agriculture and livestock, small enterprise, and skills training, reading, sports and culture, based in various locations and offering stipends. The programme can be planned for a specific number of years. It should be based on sound environmental rules, and be well guided on human rights.
7. One aim should be to start inter-district competitions and cooperation in addition to initiatives, which others are taking. Recognize the significance of University of Guyana and voluntary organizations like Food For the Poor, which have been working quietly on reconciliation.
8. And what about the Black Clothes. Will the Government still defend "what God abandoned"?
For more information about and analysis of Guyanese and Caribbean politics click here at guyanacaribbeanpolitics.com.