[ad_1]
By Selwyn R. Cudjoe, Ph.D.
May 21, 2024
Question: Would you choose someone to lead a company or organization who had failed in that role before and had not shown any signs of improving their leadership skills or understanding the challenges of the job ahead?
The question arose last week as National Security Minister Fitzgerald Hinds explained why his government retained Erla Christopher to lead the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service for another year despite worsening levels of crime and disorder, which all indicated would “get much worse”.
Hinds defended Christopher’s extension by saying: “Ella got a good rating with the Public Service Commission… The law says you have to review the commissioner’s extension for up to three years, but it can be reviewed every year. So the maximum of three years is reviewed year by year. We followed the law, just like I told you.” (The Express, May 15).
He was not content with such empty talk, he concluded: “The committee, after looking at a range of different criteria, told us that her overall evaluation was very good, so we understand that the Police Service Board who appointed her, we extended her term and now want to consider further extension, they evaluated her performance last year and found that she performed very well. With this in mind, we have more courage to act in accordance with the law and the expectations of the public interest.”
Besides repeating the word “good” ad nauseam, Hinds then added to the nonsense: “He (Hinds) pointed out that a number of serious and onerous conditions influenced the decision, saying, ‘First and foremost are the law, the Constitution and section 75 of the Police Service Act, which allow for the extension of a police officer’s appointment, and of course, I think, section 15. In any case, section 75 provided that the extension of appointment that we granted to Mrs Erla Harewood-Christopher for the past year was challenged in court and the court had to interpret that law, section 75 of the Police Service Act, as being unconstitutional and to hold that … it was quite proper that there was nothing irregular about it, that it was not unconstitutional, that it was in accordance with the law.’
When Hinds said those inappropriate words, the people of Laventille and Morvant (his constituents) were expressing the feelings and experiences within their communities. Their lived experiences were completely different from what Hinds was saying, whether it was Article 75, Article 15 or BS 121.
A few examples will suffice: “Many residents of Morvante and Laventille say they continue to witness the killing of their friends and relatives, and the government appears to have done nothing to intervene to stop the bloodshed.”
Student Ezekiel Lesley said he witnessed a murder near the community center when he was 11: “I was afraid to even walk down the street because I was afraid my life was in danger.”
A woman who called herself Joy Winn said her son was shot dead on Charlotte Street in Port of Spain on April 2. She expressed frustration at the treatment by police and the lack of opportunities for young people.
She said the Duncan Street boys told her the “government” wouldn’t give them jobs because “they’d buy guns,” to which she retorted: “They don’t have jobs to buy guns! They don’t even have jobs, they can’t spell the word gun, (but) they have guns. So they don’t have jobs to buy guns.”
Another woman, who gave her name only as Ayanna, said her brother was murdered outside the Bricks Hotel in St Anne’s on January 28. The scars are still fresh: “They killed my brother because he was from an area. Gang war. So far, nothing has been done,” she said.
Another woman said that in the past two years, “more than 25 people have died in the community and many homes have been destroyed, but not a single government official has visited these people or provided psychological counseling to these grieving people.”
A day later, one citizen wrote in a Letter to the Editor: “Extending the Police Commissioner’s contract is not only an insult to every law-abiding citizen in this country, but it shows that our government doesn’t care about its citizens.
“How can you justify retaining a ruling party that has failed in every way? Is this a caring government?” (The Express, 16 May).
Meanwhile, our devastated leaders continue to roam around India, undermining the interests of the people. Citizens should watch, listen, learn, discern and then take necessary action. Such callousness will not be good for our society.
[ad_2]
Source link
