COMMISSIONS OF INQUIRY ARE FACT-FINDING MISSIONS

June 24, 2013, By KNews, Filed Under Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom, Source

The Linden Commission of Inquiry was never asked to pronounce on the concept of ministerial responsibility. In any event, the Commission established to inquire into the events of July 18, 2012 in Linden was not the competent authority to make a pronouncement on this concept.

A Commission of Inquiry is a fact-finding mission. In the course of its work it can apply various legal concepts but it has never been in the remit of such bodies to determine and outline issues of common law, much less a political-legal concept such as ministerial responsibility.

The commission therefore could not have been asked to address the issue of ministerial responsibility as it is politically and legally understood. However, the commission did indirectly address the concept in terms of the relationship between the Minister of Home Affairs and the police.

Commissions of Inquiry are concerned with determination of facts and these facts can then be used for judicial/ political pronouncement on concepts not just about ministerial responsibility but also about the vicarious liability of those who organized the protests.

The Commission was specifically asked to “Inquire what, if any, general or specific instructions did the Minister of Home Affairs give to the Guyana Police Force to maintain law and order in Linden immediately before, during and immediately after the events on (sic) Wednesday July 18, 2012.”

The findings of the Commission of Inquiry in relation to this term of reference are as follows:
1. In so far as instructions before July 18th are concerned, the evidence pointed only to the Minister giving a direction to the Commissioner of Police to take all lawful steps to maintain law and order. ( para. 118)
2. “There is no evidence that the Minister gave instructions to anyone during the events of July 18, 2012.” ( para. 119)
3. “… no evidence emerged that the Minister gave any instructions to the police during the events of July 18, 2012 at Linden.” (para.123)
4. It was accepted by the Minister that he had ministerial responsibility to issue such orders and directions for the command and superintendence of the Guyana Police Force. In keeping with this responsibility he directed the Commissioner of Police to make changes at the command level after the events. Para 128)

The COI also noted at para 129 that “Operations fell solely under the purview of the Commissioner.”

Yet throughout this entire episode, there have been calls for the minister to resign but there has been no such call for anyone in the Guyana Police Force to step down.

There seems a strange willingness on the part of many to absolve the Guyana Police Force from any responsibility for what took place at Linden close to one year ago, as well as to render blameless those who organized and supervised the protests.

It should be recalled that during evidence led before the COI, one of the organizers said that it did not occur to him that blocking the bridge was in breach of the permission which was granted to hold a peaceful march. This, the Commission found to be indicative of the attitude of the organizers of the protest who it said must accept some responsibility for what subsequently transpired.

It was also the view of the Commission that “had the protesters responded favorably to the withdrawal request made by the police the result would have been completely different.”