As the public hearing continues before the Disciplinary Forces Commission of Enquiry (DFC) into the Guyana Police Force (GPF), one suggestion raised has been for the continuous assessment of the performance of police ranks.

In the morning session 74-year-old pensioner Victor Lobert said the breakdown in the police force was as a result of the cultural lawlessness that had gripped the country since independence.

The Commission of Enquiry has been set up by the National Assembly and has been mandated to investigate the operations of the disciplined services. The Commission is to give priority to its investigation of the Guyana Police Force, on which it is to submit a report of its findings and recommendations to the National Assembly.

The Chairman of the commission is Justice of Appeal Ian Chang and the other members include former Attorney-General Charles Ramson SC, former National Security Advisor, Brigadier (rtd) David Granger, attorney-at-law, Anil Nandlall and Irish human rights activist, Maggie Beirne. Beirne was absent from yesterday’s sitting. Meanwhile, Senior Counsel Bernard DeSantos entered an appearance for the GPF.

A former electronics engineer, Lobert suggested the establishment of proper systems for evaluation and promotion of police ranks within the force, which he considered would also provide an incentive for recruitment and engender much-needed discipline.

He proposed a scheme where members of the force, from the rank of constable to that of inspector, would be subject to monthly performance appraisals. Based on the evaluations, which are to be considered by a Promotion Board comprising members from within the Force, ranks would qualify for future promotion. In the event that they fail evaluations, which would also determine remuneration, ranks would be dismissed from service.

According to Lobert’s design, the performance evaluation would be conducted by each rank’s direct superior, rather than the Commissioner of Police, as obtains at present. By his assessment, this present system undermines the structure of the Police Force.

Lobert also advocated better training for ranks, extending to etiquette, as well as the sourcing of proper equipment such as vehicles.

“You phone the police station and you hear them say that there is no vehicle...” he said, adding that in some cases stations were not properly manned to coincide with the size of their constituents.

Meanwhile, Lobert also expressed serious concern over suggestions for the ethnic balance of the GPF, arguing that the use of ethnicity as a criteria for recruitment was not in the interest of anyone.

“You want a policeman who is capable and trained... you don’t want to bring in people just for the sake of balancing.” He founded his view on the argument that the balancing of the force did not guarantee professionalism.

“But at the end of the day [the Commission] has to find a way to make the police force more reflective of the populace, that is the reality...” Nandlall noted.

Lobert was also critical of community policing groups, which he said were guilty of abuses and may be subject to racial or political interference.

Pointing out that these groups detracted from national policing, he advanced that policing was too important to be left to persons who were drawn from the cultural lawlessness. He cited his own experience with a member of a community policing group who stole livestock from him.

“They think they have more power than they should,” Lobert said.

In the afternoon session, the commission heard allegations by a woman, the owner of a bar, who said an officer would often visit her establishment, usually in the company of other policemen, in whose presence he would make crude sexual advances. She said his intimations continued and culminated in an incident where he ripped her shirt open, leaving her exposed. The woman said during the man’s pursuit she had often complained to the other officers, and subsequent to the incident she was visited by an officer on behalf of the Police Complaints Authority.

De Santos objected to the woman’s testimony, contending that it was not relevant to the mandate of the Commission.

Though he noted that such actions would be unacceptable, he argued that if the Commission were to entertain her submissions, it would open the door for every person who had a grouse with a member of the force. Moreover, he also contended that the officer’s alleged actions were not done during his functions as a policeman and he asked if it was within the ambit of the commission to inquire into whether a police officer abused his wife when he went home after work.

Chang however noted that while an allegation had been made against one officer, his actions were a reflection on the image of the force.

Nandlall also pointed out that based on the woman’s statement, the police officer had been in uniform, with a police vehicle and under the influence of alcohol. And in similar vein, Ramson considered that relevance could be gleaned from the fact that several policemen were frequenting the bar.

De Santos at the end of the hearing proposed that the evidence be received and the Commission would at a later time make a decision on its relevance.

Also at yesterday’s hearing the President of the National Amerindian Development Foundation began his testimony and is to be recalled at a subsequent date to restructure and complete his submissions. His presentation centred on the recommendation for the creation of a Guyana Border Security Programme to work with the military to secure the country’s borders.