Dangerous precedents
Jan 31, 2017 , http://www.kaieteurnewsonline....angerous-precedents/
Unless otherwise expressly stated in the law, the power of the President, or indeed for that matter any Minister, to appoint someone, does not carry with it an automatic right to remove that person.
There have been reports in the media that the Chairman of the Police Complaints has been requested to relinquish his office. This request has seemingly been made despite the contention by the Minister of Public Security that the present Chairman is a top jurist who has been doing an excellent job as Chairman of the Authority.
Why remove someone who by the government’s own admission has been doing an excellent job? The explanation provided is age.
Well, for a government which has been described a geriatric club and which has a record of reemploying retired persons and which has put someone over the age of eighty to head an important Authority, it sure will not be consistent if the basis for the removal of the Chairperson of the Police Complaints Authority is because of the incumbent’s age.
Unless otherwise expressly stated in the law, a person appointed to a statutory position usually enjoys security of tenure. The person cannot be removed from office other than that person resigning or by virtue of mental incompetence or death.
The Police Complaints Authority Act assigns to the President, the power to appoint someone who has held the position of a judge as the Chairperson of the Police Complaints. But there is no power, under the said law, for the President to remove an incumbent Chairman.
This, of course, does not prevent the President from lawfully asking someone to step down. It is dangerous precedent to set. There is also no obligation of the office holder to step aside.
If the President feels that the person is mentally competent, the President is compelled to appoint a tribunal to establish mental incompetence. Other than that there is no basis for removing the Chairperson.
There are no powers of recall by the President for appointments to the position of Chairman of the Police Complaints Authority. And unless there is some allegation against the Chairman, he should never have been asked to step down. The President has no power to recall the Chairman and therefore, equally, has no power to ask that the person step down.
It does seem as if a decision has been taken, however, to ask the present Chairperson to resign. It is also being rumoured that another statutory Chairperson is also being asked to resign. These actions will constitute dangerous precedents if they are true. Statutory office holders enjoy tenure and should be removed or forced to step down at the behest of anyone.
The government will be undermining the independence of the statutory office if its tries to force an incumbent to resign against his or her will. We are once again sliding down a slippery slope by this recent reported decision to ask someone, who from all accounts, has his faculties intact to step down. It should not be happening. It undermines the independence of all similar statutory offices since the holders of such office will now feel that they can be asked to demit office at the request of the government.
It is not likely that the Chairman of the Police Complaints Authority will stay on when it is clear that the government does not wish him to stay on. There are some battles which decent people simply do not fight. It is not expected that any of the two gentlemen who are being asked to step aside will refuse to do so. They are both gentlemen who will know when they are not wanted.
The big question is who will ask those retirees and old fogies within the government to step down and give young people a chance.
