Vulnerable groups, in-cluding women and Amerindians, were lar-gely left out of the opportunity to inform the reform policies for the police force, be-cause of the Disciplined Forces Commission's "overly legal" approach to its work.

"The emphasis pl-aced on written submissions, the brevity of visits outside Georgetown, and the lack of any provision for confidential submissions all contributed to discourage participation [of those most directly affected]," former Commissioner Maggie Beirne wrote in her appendix to the Commission's interim report on the Guyana Police Force.

She said the unnecessarily legalistic procedures, which were abandoned in other reviews of the police, militated against the participation by those most directly affected.

"I am particularly aware that very few women appeared before the Com-mission, and gender issues were rarely raised. The same could be said for Amerindians, young people, and the poor and socially disadvantaged and yet these are the very groups that often suffer most directly from poor policing."

The commission was set up by the National Assembly to review the police force and the other Disciplined Forces and to make recommendations for their reform. The Commission is chaired by Justice of Appeal Ian Chang S.C., and also includes former Attorney-General Charles Ra-mson S.C, Brigadier (rtd) David Granger and attorney Anil Nandlall.

Beirne, who helped draft the report before she resigned from the Commission, owing to her other commitments, said she believes the procedure adopted by the commission actually discouraged participation.

She said she was concerned about "the overly legal emphasis" in the commission's procedures and its substantive discussions, although she admits that a better understanding of legal weaknesses or inadequacies in the powers and duties of the police is a key issue.

"But the terms of reference would suggest that the Assembly had expected us to range further in our examination of the problems and possible solutions.

"However, reference to the Commissions of Inquiry Act, the choice of chair, and the overall composition emphasised legal expertise over anything else."

Though she said a wealth of individual and organisational testimony was brought before the commission, Beirne was of the view that the Interim Report did not do it justice.

Beirne's appendix contained her comments on her "major reservations" on a number of important issues which she felt that the commission was mistaken, in either its approach or its conclusions.

These included the commission's conclusions on community policing, ethnic balance, extra-judicial executions and the political independence of the force, issues which she tried to have amended, albeit with insufficient success.

"Even... if these comments do not secure favour with my fellow Commissioners in their final deliberations, I believe that the issues must be addressed urgently by policymakers."

Though not contained in the Appendix, she said she was also concerned about issues not even addressed in the report, like the need for a "new beginning" to policing, to create public confidence in the force and the benefits human rights principles could make to policing.