Guyana’s refusal of British request for ‘live firing’ at Amerindian border community
Written by
Wednesday, 28 October 2009 17:49 - Last Updated Wednesday, 28 October 2009 17:51

British withdrawal from SSRP prompted by…
- Dr. Luncheon assures SSRP will be implemented at Gov’t expense

QUOTE:“It is tempting to believe that this about-face from the December 2008 joint agreement to what happened in the middle of 2009 might have been associated with some decision that the Guyanese Government made with request for training by the UK Special Forces, on a Western Border location with live firing to which the Government was unprepared to support.” – Dr. Luncheon

NEGOTIATIONS with the United Kingdom (UK) Government for a 4.9M pounds sterling security sector reform project have been abandoned by that Government. However, Guyana remains committed to the reform of the sector although it will be at a different pace and funded by the Government. The Press and Publicity Unit at the Office of the President late last night issued a brief statement on the situation, saying it has noted a report about the UK government’s withdrawal from the Guyana Security Sector Reform Project.

“This decision by the UK Government is believed to be linked to the administration’s refusal to permit training of British Special Forces in Guyana using live firing in an Amerindian community on the western border with Brazil and Venezuela,” the OP statement said. And Head of the Presidential Secretariat and Cabinet Secretary Dr. Roger Luncheon, in an earlier statement last evening issued via the Government Information Agency (GINA), said the decision is regrettable and noted the project itself had attracted media attention in the past. Dr. Luncheon pointed out that from the trend of the negotiations, it was expected that there would have been approval and implementation.

He recalled that as late as December 2008, the two parties, the Government of Guyana and the Government of the UK, had agreed in Georgetown on a design that was submitted to the principals in the UK for their blessings. In April 2009, Luncheon said “Guyanese were advised about the re-design that was unilaterally carried out by the UK when they submitted their response to our joint December 2008 submission”. He said this design “violated the sovereignty of Guyana” and “it was drawn to the attention of the British High Commission here in Guyana and after efforts it was agreed that the government would submit its revised version of the British design”.

President Bharrat Jagdeo was involved in the revision of the document after which it was presented to the British High Commission in detail which outlined Guyana’s version of the model to be used to design and ultimately implement the Security Sector Project. “Lo and behold, the President was involved in the discussion surrounding the new design submitted by the Guyanese team when he was informed that the project itself had been halted and the UK Government had provided him with information saying that they were not interested in pursuing an agreement with the Government of Guyana,” Dr. Luncheon stated.

He further pointed out, “It is tempting to believe that this about-face from the December 2008 joint agreement to what happened in the middle of 2009 might have been associated with some decision that the Guyanese Government made with request for training by the UK Special
Forces, on a Western Border location with live firing to which the Government was unprepared to support.” The Cabinet Secretary stated it is possible that the UK Government is not aware of Guyana’s commitment and emphasis on the vision of non-violation of the sovereignty of Guyana. “Their insistence in installing in their design in April, (comprise) management features, seriously compromise Guyana’s ownership and when our new design re-established ownership that was more consistent with our notions of sovereignty, the plug was pulled. I started by saying it was regrettable; it’s unfortunate because our joint positions at the beginning was Security Sector Reform in its entirety was indeed in our best interest. Security Sector Reform will continue in Guyana, maybe at a different pace and the scope and the design will be differen but the implementation of that will be from public funds from the Government of Guyana,” Dr. Luncheon said.

Source

UK says Guyana proposal avoided real police revamp
By STABROEK STAFF |
LOCAL NEWS | THURSDAY, OCTOBER 29, 2009 Updated: 10:03 am

The British government yesterday defended its decision to withdraw assistance for a joint £4.9M security sector project, saying the latest proposal by the Government of Guyana (GoG) moves away from comprehensive reforms originally requested.

In a statement issued by the British High Commission, the UK government also said there was no truth to the GoG suggestion that the decision to scrap the Security Sector Reform Project was linked with a UK military exercise conducted here last year. The UK emphasised that it fully respected the right of the GoG to determine the direction of Guyana’s security sector and related programmes, but explained that the government’s latest proposal suggests a “fundamentally different” programme, focused on police modernisation instead of wider reforms.

AFC MP Raphael Trotman, a vocal critic of government’s approach to security sector reform, yesterday blasted the collapse of the project.
He dubbed the Project the “best plan” presented to the government in over a decade and said its continued failure to implement needed security reforms is at the peril of the people.

On Tuesday, Cabinet Secretary Dr Roger Luncheon said the GoG submitted a revised version of a British proposal for the design and implementation of the project. He noted that the British design, which the GoG criticised earlier this year for threatening the sovereignty of the country, included management features that seriously compromise Guyana’s ownership of the process. Luncheon added, “When our new design re-established ownership that was more consistent with our notions of sovereignty, the plug was pulled.”

But according to the UK Government, the GoG’s proposal reflects a fundamentally different programme than the one it understood Guyana wanted. It said its understanding was based on President Bharrat Jagdeo’s letters of May 4, 2006 and August 14, 2006, where he expressed an interest in comprehensive, broad-based, non-partisan and compelling reform of the security sector. “The latest proposal from the Government of Guyana suggests a focus on police modernisation, rather than on holistic security sector reform,” the UK explained in its statement, adding that after careful consideration, it “decided to withdraw its offer of assistance in this area.” It noted that the decision was not taken lightly and was communicated in person to President Jagdeo and in writing to Luncheon, who led the negotiations for the GoG.

The funding has been re-allocated to “other pressing needs” within the Caribbean, the UK said, while noting that it would continue to support development. “We remain committed to supporting the development of Guyana and the Caribbean and will continue to work closely with the Government of Guyana on economic growth, private sector development, and to support the country’s efforts to implement the Low Carbon Development Strategy,” it said.

The British also emphasised that there is no truth in the suggestion that the decision was linked to a UK military exercise. Luncheon and the Office of the President (OP) noted the possibility of a connection between the decision to scrap the project and the GoG’s refusal to allow training by a UK Special Forces on a western border location with live firing. The UK, however, pointed out that the decision by the Guyanese authorities in June 2008 to deny live firing as part of the exercise was fully accepted. The exercise took place, successfully, without live firing, in November 2008, it added.

The project hit a major stumbling block earlier in the year after Guyana vocalised concerns about encroachments on sovereignty, believed to include the stationing of overseas law enforcement professionals in the police force. The dispute sparked sharp exchanges between Luncheon and the British High Commissioner Fraser Wheeler, who said he was “frustrated” with the delays in implementation that he blamed on persons in government. He did not go into details of the delays but noted that the UK saw the need for tight management of resources.

Meanwhile, Trotman yesterday said that the AFC was saddened but not surprised that the project was abandoned and he charged that the administration’s disinterest in a ‘root causes’ approach to crime-fighting and security sector management is jeopardising the safety of the citizenry.

He noted that the project was specifically designed to go beyond the operational aspects of reform by examining root causes, and the socio-political aspects of the security dilemmas facing. To this end, it was expected that many national stakeholders would play a part, including MPs and civil society. According to Trotman, the GoG was only intended to be the “vehicle” through which the reform process would be facilitated. “The Jagdeo administration is reminded that there is far more at stake nationally, other than the protection of its petty, partisan, and puerile interests,” he said.

He noted that it was clear from the time that fugitive Rondell `Fineman’ Rawlins and his cohorts were hunted down that the government had no real intention of proceeding with the holistic reforms. “[It] was the best plan presented to this government in over a decade, and we firmly believe that the OP was not interested in reform except to receive the weapons and material and the training to go along with the Joint Operation that was put together to kill Rawlins and his gang,” Trotman declared. He added that destabilisation and occasional turmoil in the country suits some narrow political interests. In this regard, he pointed out that with each new outbreak of violence the government turns the screws tighter, denying more civil liberties and committing atrocities such as torture in the name of crime fighting and confronting domestic terrorism. What is more, he warned that notwithstanding the relative calm in the country at present, many of the causes of past outbreaks of violent crime remain and have not been addressed.

While he conceded that every state has a duty to safeguard its sovereignty, Trotman called the issue a “red herring” that has been raised as a distraction and to create an excuse to pull away from implementation. “The AFC believes that the PPP is playing with fire and putting the lives of citizens at risk,” he said, saying that one only has to look at the Lusignan, Bartica, Lindo Creek and recent Essequibo River incidents to know that “the security sector in Guyana is in trouble and that we need help to strengthen and modernise it.”
Trotman reiterated that there is a deliberate disconnect between the OP and the parliamentary oversight mechanisms put in place to oversee policy development and implementation within the security sector. He said it betrays a deep reluctance on the part of the administration to implement reform measures along with its total lack of knowledge of the security perils that the country faces and the consequences that will follow.

Although Luncheon said security sector reform would continue in Guyana, Trotman highlighted the GoG’s failure to implement recommendations of the 2000 National Security Strategy Organising Committee, the 2001 Border/ National Security Committee, the 2003 Disciplined Forces Commis-sion and the 2005-2009 National Drug Strategy Master Plan 2005-2009, saying the pattern is pellucid and unmistakable.

“This refusal to participate and implement wherever, and whenever, the need for comprehensive reform is identified within institutions that touch on governance, clearly demonstrates, that the Jagdeo administration predictably frustrates the process to achieve its objective of ensuring minimal or no governance reforms,” he emphasised.

Source

UK scraps $1.6b security project
By STABROEK STAFF |
LOCAL NEWS | WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2009 Updated: 10:22 am

The government yesterday confirmed a BBC report that a 4.9m pounds sterling security sector reform project with the UK had collapsed following differences between the two countries.


Roger Luncheon

In a statement last night, the Office of the President (OP) linked the collapse of the project to the denial of a UK request for a live firing exercise in the west of Guyana. “This decision by the UK Government is believed to be linked to the administration’s refusal to permit training of British Special Forces in Guyana using live firing in a hinterland community on the western border with Brazil and Venezuela”, the OP statement said last night.

Observers note, however, that the project had been in serious trouble earlier this year after Guyana objected to certain preconditions which were thought to include the stationing of overseas law enforcement professionals in the police force here. The dispute had sparked sharp statements from Head of the Presidential Secretariat, Dr Roger Luncheon, who had responsibility for the project, and the British High Commissioner here, Fraser Wheeler. Luncheon went as far as offering his resignation to the President over the dispute.

Yesterday, the BBC Caribbean report disclosed that the project had been called off after the two countries failed to agree on its management. It said that the decision to abandon the programme followed a meeting between a top official of the UK’s Department for International Development, DfID, and Guyana’s President, Bharrat Jagdeo.

Last night, Luncheon issued his own statement on the matter. He said the decision by the UK Government was believed to be linked to the administration’s refusal to permit training of British Special Forces in Guyana using live firing in a community on the western border with Brazil and Venezuela.

“The position of the Government of Guyana is that indeed the decision is regrettable. Guyanese would recall that the project itself attracted quite a bit of media attention and has indeed been characterized by ups and downs in the public engagements; however, the trend in the negotiation was what led to expectations that the project itself would be approved and implemented.” He noted that as late as December 2008, the two parties had agreed on it in Georgetown and a design was submitted to the principals in the UK for their blessings. He pointed out that in April 2009 Guyanese were advised about a redesign that was unilaterally carried out by the UK when they submitted their response to the joint December 2008 submission.

“This design violated the sovereignty of Guyana. It was drawn to the attention of the British High Commission here in Guyana and after efforts it was agreed that the government would submit its revised version of the British design. The President was involved in that activity and ultimately the British High Commission was presented with a document that in great detail outlined what was the Guyanese version of the model to be used to design and ultimately to implement the Security Sector Reform project”, Luncheon said.

Luncheon said that President Jagdeo was later informed that the project itself had been halted and the UK Government had provided him with information saying that they were not interested in pursuing an agreement with the Government of Guyana. Said Luncheon: “It is tempting to believe that this about face from the December 2008 joint agreement to what happened in the middle of 2009 might have been associated with some decision that the Guyanese Government made with request to training by the UK Special Forces, on a Western border location with live firing to which the government was unprepared to support.”

“It could be that the UK Government did not fully appreciate how dearly held was our position on the non-violation of the sovereignty of Guyana. Their insistence in installing in their design in April, … management features that seriously compromise Guyana’s ownership and when our new design re-established ownership that was more consistent with our notions of sovereignty, the plug was pulled. I started by saying it was regrettable; it’s unfortunate because our joint positions at the beginning was Security Sector Reform in its entirety was indeed in our best interest. Security Sector Reform will continue in Guyana, maybe at a different pace and the scope and the design will be different, but the implementation of that will be from public funds from the Government of Guyana”, he added.

The scrapping of the project and the tiff over it will be tagged as a worsening of relations between the two countries at a time when Guyana needs to mobilize as much support as possible for security and its low carbon development strategy. Britain is a key player in this process and the scuppering of the deal would likely point to its dissatisfaction with Georgetown over the fundamentals of security reform. Various interest groups have urged root and branch reform of the police force to curb corruption.

The UK deal had been conceptualized shortly after the massacres in 2007 and following a request from the government here which had been deeply shocked by the killings. Observers said interest in Georgetown for the project diminished after the security situation improved. The government here has steadfastly rebuffed any attempt to place foreign professionals in the force or to cede any modicum of control over the force.

In June, British High Commissioner Wheeler had said that he was “frustrated” with the delays in implementation and he blamed persons in government “quibbling” over administrative details for holding it up. Although he did not go into the details of the delay in the process, he emphasised that the UK sees the need for “very tight management of resources” in the current economic climate. “The administration of money should not be a deal breaker, I would hope, [the reform is] too important for that,” Wheeler said.

An interim Memorandum of Understanding for the Security Sector Reform Action Plan was signed in August 2007. Since that time, Luncheon has been responsible for engagement with the UK government’s representatives. Late last year, a framework for the “Formulation and Implementation of a National Security Policy and Strategy” was concluded. Subsequently, in April the representatives of the UK’s DfID and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) advised that their government had given approval for the agreed design for reform and they offered two documents that provided details of implementation.

It was this April report that Dr Luncheon had strongly objected to in letters he wrote to President Jagdeo and Wheeler. “The content of their April submission is offensive, suggesting that Guyana is totally incapable of managing its own Security Sector Reform and needed to be spoon fed in the implementing of all aspects of the Security Sector Reform contemplated in the GOG/UK engagement,” Luncheon informed Jagdeo in the letter. He added that based on their submissions, he could not accept that the resident representatives of the British government seriously intended his continued involvement.

“Mr. President, I am left to conclude that the representatives had to have an ulterior motive in presenting these two documents whose content they were quite aware I would find offensive and unacceptable,” he had said. Luncheon’s letter also indicated that the engagements had been “challenging” and he said his experiences revealed the UK’s representatives to be “insincere and inconsistent” with regard to Guyana’s concerns about national ownership of the process. “The records would show that with each important step along the way I have had to repeatedly address issues of National Ownership and even resort to your inputs at times,” he wrote.

He also communicated similar concerns about the motives of the British government’s resident representatives to Wheeler, explaining that it was owing to his disappointment with the UK’s proposals on management of the project, the process and the timeline, that he intended to withdraw from further participation. He also mentioned his recommendation to his principals that the proposals be rejected in their entirety, while suggesting that they did not reflect the commitments agreed during the bilateral engagements.

Although he noted the Guyana’s government’s “profoundly negative reactions” to the proposals, Luncheon also indicated to Wheeler its appreciation of the efforts made during the bilateral engagements “in progressively agreeing in principle” with a programme for security sector reform in Guyana.

In keeping with components of the plan, in January this year, Major General (Ret) Michael Atherly was appointed Project Coordinator for Security Sector Reform, with a Security Sector Reform Secretariat established within the Office of the President, while the National Assembly approved the creation of an Oversight Committee for the Security Sector.

The five main elements of the plan cover building the operational capacity of the police force; strengthening policy-making across the security sector to make it more transparent, effective, and better coordinated; mainstreaming financial management in the security sector into public sector financial management reform; creating substantial parliamentary and other oversight of the security sector; and building greater public participation and inclusiveness in security sector issues. The plan was specifically designed to complement the ongoing IDB Citizen Security and Justice Reform programmes, in a bid to tackle crime and security in a holistic manner.

A parliamentary committee has been set up to review the plan’s implementation, but it has met only once to elect a chairman. The review committee is expected to receive and examine official annual reports from the administration on the status of the implementation of the activities in 11 priority areas on an annual basis and also to provide a final report to the National Assembly of its examination of the reports on the implementation of the entire action plan.

The priority areas were identified after extensive discussions and consultations with stakeholders, including the leadership of the law enforcement agencies, the public and the donor community. Among the short-term priority areas were: the establishment of a special firearms support team to execute high-risk operations with regard to terrorism, hijacking, hostage release and negotiations and specialized tactical deployment; developing an anti-crime unit through support for an operational protocol, provide training on technical aspects of anti-crime operations and the acquisition of operational equipment and resources among other things; boosting crime intelligence by supporting the capability of the police force with regard to the gathering, analysis, interpretation, dissemination and management of strategic and operational crime-related information; and developing forensic capacity.

Source

Security…The sad saga of security sector reform
By STABROEK STAFF |
GUYANA REVIEW | TUESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2009

Public safety in Guyana is still precarious. If there is to be change, serious, strategic, sustainable reform of the security sector must be restarted soon.

By David A Granger

The Guyanese public learnt from the BBC in late October of the British Government’s decision to abandon the negotiations with the Guyana Government of Guyana on the ₤ 4.9M Security Sector Reform Action Plan. The administration responded with resignation but without a full explanation of the implications of the British action for day-to-day law enforcement in Guyana.


British High Commissioner leads the security sector reform team

The need for security sector reform became evident in attempts to suppress the troubles which erupted and escalated on the East Coast in the aftermath of the breakout of the gang of five desperadoes from the Georgetown Prison on 23rd February 2002. The Guyana Police Force was unprepared for the intensity and severity of criminal violence and gang warfare. It was clear that extraordinary solutions had to be found both to the short-term situations created by the crisis and to the long-term maintenance of public safety.

Official responses to the crisis were hardly surprising given the standard of training, the shortage of manpower and the state of resources and equipment in the Police Force at that time. These deficiencies, in the public mind, were aggravated by the reported misconduct of rogue policemen in the Target Special Squad who were blamed for the shooting to death of several suspected criminals. The attitudes of other members of the Tactical Service Unit have also been criticized. Many villagers alleged that young men were detained without warrant; that suspects had been shot down without investigations being held; that their homes had been repeatedly searched and that their property was damaged without compensation. Security operations, as a result, received scant cooperation from the public.

Criminal elements filled the void created by the absence of effective law enforcement. Death squads sprung up and dubious shoot-to-kill tactics were employed against suspects. Although many known criminals were executed in the counter-crime campaign, many policemen − the largest number in the history of the Police Force − were also killed by bandits. Worse still, the surge in criminal violence was augmented most visibly by the growth in narcotics trafficking and the influx of a large quantity of assault rifles and ammunition into the country.


Another casualty of the nocturnal 'Phantom Gang'

Cooperation

In light of the grave crisis in public safety, President Bharrat Jagdeo promulgated a $100 M, counter-crime plan on 7th June 2002. The menu of measures included a complete review of the existing legislation on crime; comprehensive reform of intelligence-gathering, analysis and dissemination; improving the Criminal Investigation Department’s investigative and forensic capability; establishing a specialised training school where policemen would be exposed to modern methods of anti-crime tactics and creating a ‘crack squad’ along the lines of a special weapons and tactics team.

This plan had little immediate effect on the raging violence although it did much to explain the President’s concept of security reform at that time. The administration also initiated various consultative measures − including establishing the Steering Committee of the National Consultation on Crime, the Border and National Security Committee and the Disciplined Forces Commission − to seek solutions to the unfolding national security crisis.

The administration then approached the British government for security assistance. President Jagdeo visited London in May 2002 and personally met with the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police to seek support for his counter-crime campaign. The following year, 2003, a UK Defence Advisory Team visited the country and produced a report on ways in which the capability of the Police Force could be enhanced. The next year, in October 2004, another Defence Advisory Team visited, as did a group of instructors to train members of the Police Force’s Tactical Service Unit to become the core of a Special Weapons and Tactics strike force. The next year, an eight-member team of officials from the Scottish Police Service and the English Police Service came to study the functioning of the Police Force. A Security Sector Defence Advisory Team visited and issued another report in November.

The president personally met Baroness Valerie Amos in Georgetown in April 2006, soon after the assassination of a government minister, Satyadeow Sawh. Baroness Amos had previously served as Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and as International Development Secretary and the two were able to agree on a Statement of Principles which became the basis for what was to be the final round in the saga of security sector reform. The same year, a team from the Global Facilitation Network for Security Sector Reform came to conduct a study of the Police Force that led to the Security Sector Reform in Guyana report in 2007. A task force from the National Policing Improvement Agency International Academy then visited.

The cumulative effect of all of these initiatives was to show that enough evidence and experience existed to draft, finally, a comprehensive Security Sector Reform in Guyana plan. That proposal included specific support to the reform process in the Police Force over a two year period, 2006-2008.

Implementation

Security cooperation between Guyana and Britain never ceased during this period. The International Policing Adviser for Latin America and the Caribbean spearheaded a task force from the National Policing Improvement Agency International Academy at Bramshill and the Scottish Police College to begin to implement the Security Sector Reform Action Plan. The international department of the Scottish Police College, which provides learning and development opportunities in operational policing, police leadership and performance management and Centrex − the trading name of the Central Police Training and Development Authority which was subsumed within the new National Policing Improvement Agency − have been involved with local police problems and programmes for a long time.

The Scottish Police College, in particular, has executed several projects since 2004. Starting with a scoping exercise to assess the Police Force’s training requirements in December 2004, it then conducted a series of management training programmes in February-June 2005; an assessment of the impact of the previously delivered training programmes in December 2005; and another scoping exercise in May 2006. Those were followed in June 2006 by the presentation of the Guyana Police Force Strategic Plan in partnership with the Inter-American Development Bank as part of the Guyana Citizens Security Programme. It also executed a project to assess the police force’s operational capability in October 2007.

British consultants from the Police Service of Northern Ireland also continued to work with the Police Force to help develop crime intelligence, advise on structures, provide training and conduct a needs analysis for the setting-up of the new, expanded Criminal Intelligence Unit, in March 2008 under the Interim Memorandum of Understanding.

It seemed evident that the type of organisation and level of administration required to support the reform process might have been underestimated. In fact, even before the troubles on the East Coast had erupted, and in response to the Guyana Government’s specific request in 2000, the United Kingdom Department for International Development had commissioned a strategic review of the Guyana Police Force which produced the comprehensive Guyana Police Reform Programme, conducted by the Symonds Group Limited.

Known locally as the Symonds’ Report, it was aimed at helping the force’s senior management to determine the functions of an accountable, professional force; developing a community-based policing style; and helping the government to identify the areas to strengthen performance, accountability and community orientation of the Force. The establishment of a witness protection programme and better management of information, particularly with regard to fighting narco-trafficking, were also recommended.

For most of the past seven years, the Guyana Government has been receiving British Government assistance to reform the security sector and to support the improvement of the Police Force’s capability. The efficiency of the British public safety establishments which have been so frequently involved in advising and training the Police Force has not been disputed. But it was always up to the Guyana Government to implement the policy recommendations which have been made.

No one should pretend that the administration and the Police Force itself were not affected by capability constraints and little was achieved in implementing these weighty recommendations in a holistic manner. The Police Force itself did establish a ‘Task Force on Organisation Change’ but this collapsed because of inadequate funding and full-time staffing. It was not until January 2009 that the Security Sector Reform Secretariat was established within the Office of the President as a permanent institution to continuously manage change in the security sector.

Concept

It became clear, as time went by, that the practice of sending groups of experts to study Guyana’s security sector problems and to make recommendations was not contributing sufficiently to improving public safety. But then there was a change in both the concept and content of proposed security sector reform. Assistance from donor countries was required to conform to current international practice as prescribed by guidelines promulgated by the Paris-based Organi-sation for Economic Cooperation and Development to which the United Kingdom subscribes.

The OECD’s Development Assistance Committee defined security sector reform as seeking to increase a country’s ability to meet the range of security needs within society “in a manner consistent with democratic norms and sound principles of governance, transparency and the rule of law [that] includes, but extends well beyond, the narrower focus of more traditional security assistance on defence, intelligence and policing.”

Britain’s agreement with Guyana, therefore, should be seen in the context of this concept. It is not the result of a stand-alone bilateral agreement but, rather, a prescription based on established guiding principles, tailored to national needs but in accord with international security norms. The Security Sector Reform Action Plan has been determined by the key policy and operational commitments derived from the Implementation Framework for Security Sector Reform that was agreed on 4th April 2007.

Adherence to the Implemen-tation Framework ensures that the UK’s support for security sector reform programmes is effective and sustainable. It should be quite obvious that, in order to achieve both effectiveness and sustainability, “local ownership” by the Government of Guyana is essential. Accordingly, the Framework states, “The bottom line is that reforms that are not shaped and driven by local actors are unlikely to be implemented properly and sustained.” This, indeed, might have been the problem with earlier efforts prior to 2007 which petered out once the experts departed. Hence, the recent concern has been to improve Guyana Government capability, develop a national security policy and build accountability and oversight.

Under this new OECD-driven Framework, there had been a deliberate moving away from ad hoc, short-term projects to longer-term, strategic engagements; an appreciation of the need to support partner countries in leading the reform process and the adoption of a multi-layered, multi-stakeholder approach which can target assistance to state and non-state actors. The Framework requires donors to aim at the improvement of basic security and justice delivery, the establishment of effective governance, oversight and accountability system and the development of local leadership and ownership of a reform process to review the capacity and technical needs of the security system.

Coordination

It has been apparent, at least for the past couple of years, that security sector reform assistance would be available only in accordance with this overarching strategic concept. The Guyana Government understands the paradigmatic change and this explains why it established an oversight committee for the security sector in the National Assembly; appointed Major General (Ret) Michael Atherly as Project Coordinator for Security Sector Reform and established the Security Sector Reform Secretariat.

The parliamentary committee established to review the implementation of the Plan was required to receive and examine official annual reports from the administration on the status of the implementation of the activities in eleven priority areas on an annual basis and also to provide a final report of its examination of the reports on the implementation of the entire Plan to the National Assembly. These measures were components of the Plan and did emphasise the importance of Guyanese “ownership” of the reform process.

The four-year, ₤3M, bilateral Interim Memorandum of Understanding for a Security Sector Reform Action Plan that was signed by British High Commissioner to Guyana Fraser Wheeler and Head of the Presidential Secretariat Dr. Roger Luncheon on 10th August 2007 was intended to integrate the initiatives of several years worth of reports, recommendations training courses and visits.

The Plan, in the main, provided for building the operational capacity of the Police Force, from the provision of a uniformed response to serious crime, forensics, crime intelligence and traffic policing; strengthening policy-making across the security sector to make it more transparent, effective and better co-ordinated; mainstreaming financial management in the security sector into public sector financial management reform; creating substantial parliamentary and other oversight of the security sector and building greater public participation and inclusiveness in security sector issues.

The Plan was designed also to complement the ongoing Citizen Security and Justice Reform programmes, in an effort to tackle crime and security in a holistic manner and in accord with the OECD’s Framework.

Despite the substantial body of Guyana-Britain security sector reform cooperation over the years, controversy arose in late May over the modalities for advancement of the Plan. An extreme interpretation of the event appeared in an article in the Weekend Mirror newspaper, published on 3rd June, which stated “After 43 years of independence, the British are still trying their best to have their way in the management of the Guyanese affairs” and cited the controversy between the Office of the President and the British High Commission over the security sector reform project as an example.

Controversy

The controversy, in fact, arose out of the negotiations to upgrade the interim memorandum to a permanent agreement as the Framework for the Formulation and Implementation of a National Security Policy and Strategy.” According to Dr. Roger Luncheon − Head of the Presidential Secretariat and Secretary to the Guyana Defence Board and who had governmental responsibility for the project − the framework for the “Formulation and Implemen-tation of a National Security Policy and Strategy” was concluded last year. But in his view, the version of the Security Sector Reform in Guyana Plan which was approved by the British government in April contained a proposal for a four-tiered British management structure which handed the British side “complete control” of the management of the programme.

Luncheon said that such a proposal was “offensive” and would not be tolerated by the Govern-ment of Guyana. The British, he thought, were attempting to convince Guyana that it was suffering from a “capacity constraint” in project implementation, a notion with which the government disagreed totally. He asserted that “Guyanese ownership” of the Plan will be maintained and that the government “will not relent one bit on this.” He added that the implementation of the reforms would indeed be facilitated by the British involvement, but that he is “not going to give up one our dignity [and] our sovereignty for the contribution that could come from this engagement”.

British High Commissioner Fraser Wheeler, on the other hand, reiterated that the British government was committed to Guyanese “ownership” of the process which was designed to be in accord with the OECD paradigm for security assistance. Expectedly, though, local discussions in Guyana between the High Commission and the Office of the President were subject to approval by the UK government which was committed to financing the Plan and this might have been the source of some misunderstanding. He stated plainly that he was dissatisfied with the delay in implementing the reform plan, accusing “some persons” in the administration of “quibbling about administrative details.”

The comments of both the Head of the Presidential Secretariat and the High Commissioner immediately made headline news in late May. Despite the media frenzy, however, moderate counsel seem-ed to prevail by mid-June. Writing in the Weekend Mirror newspaper, Speaker of the National Assembly Ralph Ramkarran referred to the controversy and complained that it was “painful to see relations between the British and Guyana Governments, underlined by unusually strong language, take a negative turn.” Ramkarran’s optimism, however, seems to have been misplaced and the Plan is now dead in the water.

Any objective evaluation of the efforts to reform the security sector over the past seven years would indicate that much ground had been covered; Guyana has been the beneficiary without its sovereignty being compromised. Equally, any review of the public safety situation in the country at present would show how much more still needs to be done.

After the collapse of the British-funded Plan, Dr Luncheon promised that “Security Sector Reform will continue in Guyana, maybe at a different pace and the scope and the design will be different, but the implementation of that will be from public funds from the Government of Guyana.” We shall wait and see what happens.

Source

British High Commission issues statement on Guyana’s security reform programme
May 29, 2009

GEORGETOWN, Guyana — Caribbean Net News has received an email from the British High Commission in London on Guyana’s Security Sector Reform Programme.

The email states, ” We have seen via the media a letter allegedly written by Dr Roger Luncheon to President Jagdeo dated 6 May 2009 asking that he be relieved of his responsibilities in negotiating security sector reform with the British Government.” The email added, “This is a government of Guyana matter, and it is not for us to comment.” “We remain committed to Guyana’s national ownership of the Security Sector reform programme and to build the capacity of national institutions to implement it. We remain open and ready to discuss any issue in relation to the programme,” the statement went on to say.

Caribbean Net News

Source

The various comments by Luncheon suggest that there was more at stake than just a live-fire exercise. The Brits are not known for their altruism in foreign policy. There is usually a hidden agenda.

Sovereignty and dictatorship
MAY 31, 2009 | BY KNEWS | FILED UNDER FEATURES / COLUMNISTS, FREDDIE KISSOON

There wasn’t any talk about sovereignty when the PPP, as an opposition party, went around the globe begging governments and international organizations to intervene to pressure the Burnham Government. There wasn’t any talk about sovereignty when the PPP begged Jimmy Carter to monitor the 1992 elections. There wasn’t any talk about sovereignty when the IMF insisted that the PPP Government, after 1992, continue the structural adjustment programme originally demanded of the Hoyte presidency. There isn’t any talk about sovereignty when all Guyanese know the IMF sets the targets for the Guyana Government and those targets have to be met.

What is the difference now with a British-funded security programme and the loss of sovereignty that the Guyana Government is now crying about? Here is the explanation. The IMF, IDB, USAID, World Bank, Caribbean Development Bank, the British, American and Canadian Governments give financial assistance to Guyana, but they do not touch the way the Guyana Government runs the country. These aid donors have never demanded a role in governance so as to ensure that the Guyana Government adheres to the principles of democracy. So the Guyana Government takes international aid but never reciprocates on the issue of good governance and it gets away with elected dictatorship.
The last debt relief package was championed by Tony Blair when he was Prime Minister of the UK and his position and that of then Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown, was that in return the recipients would practice good governance. Those were the exact words of Mr. Brown. Since then, the Jagdeo presidency has expanded its dictatorial base.

Now we come to the so-called loss of sovereignty. Did you notice that the rallying cry of Dr. Luncheon is that the if the British are allowed to implement the security sector reform the way they want to, it means that Guyana’s sovereignty would be compromised, but he does not explain in what ways. He went on to talk about the Guyanese ownership of the agreement but he stays far away from defining what he means by that and how Guyanese ownership would be in conflict with what the British want. Dr. Luncheon and President Jagdeo, I predict, will not tell the nation what the British proposals are that would undermine Guyana’s status of a proud, sovereign nation. They will not do that because the Guyanese people will reject their arguments.

Under the security sector reform agreement, the British have opted for the stationing of a few of their people on the ground here.
In other words, they will send British security personnel to work with the Guyana Police Force. This is the nightmare that the Guyana Government saw and bolted away. Why? First, the British Government is not comfortable with entrusting the programme to the Guyana Police Force because of its suspicion of a few top cops. Secondly, the British want to expand the arrangement to include a civil society component. Thirdly, they want their people to be on the ground to assess the ongoing status of the arrangement. If allowed, Guyana will join some of its Caricom neighbours in having foreign-based security personnel in the upper echelons of the police force.

The nightmare for the Guyana Government is that the Guyana-based British consultants will have access to information and people that the Government under no circumstances wants them to have. Is it not interesting to hear what the American Ambassador asserted when asked about the contents of the Roger Khan file? He emphasized that after sentencing, then, the files will be shared with Guyana’s security people. It is simple to understand. The Americans do not want the information that relates to the Roger Khan confession to be in the lap of Guyana’s security officials for the same reasons that they have sealed indictments for about ten Guyanese alleged traffickers that they have kept away from the police force here.

All this talk about loss of sovereignty is a mask to hide the reality that the British consultants will know sooner than later which politician is compromised and which police officer may not be a holy man. A senior reporter of this newspaper and I know about a drive-by shooting that almost claimed the life of a man. The victim has openly blamed a wealthy Guyanese that he is in conflict with and the stakes involve a lot of money. That case has become cold for reasons you and I know about. Things like these the British consultants will know. Just as the victim talked to me and the reporter, he will talk to the British cops. Strange that the DEA office hasn’t opened up as yet in Georgetown. There is so much some people have to hide.

Source

UK still has interest in Guyana’s security sector - Simon Bond

Britain’s top diplomat here said that his country still has an interest in Guyana’s security sector. He said that it is a fundamental issue, despite cancellation of a US$8 million security sector reform project in 2009 over differences between the Guyana and British governments.

Speaking to Guyana Times in an interview last Friday, British High Commissioner (ag) Simon Bond said that the British government currently does not have any plans on its agenda in the area of security for Guyana, although “maybe things may change in the future.” The UK’s assistance to Guyana, dating back to 2009, has been substantial in the area of security.Bond said it was ‘unfortunate’ that the two governments could not come to an agreement on the best way forward in implementing the programme in 2009.

“Our conclusion at the time of the Security Sector Reform Programme (SSRP) was that training was fine up to a point, but actually, if you want to have a real impact, you have to start looking at the sector a bit more holistically; looking at the policy area, the approach and how the structures are set up, and really sort of asking yourself the questions, whether this is the right arrangement; the right structures to combat the security challenges that Guyana faces. Because, frankly, the challenges in 2011 are different from what they might have been, say, in 1957. So I think the systems have to adapt with the times,” he said, adding that those guidelines were the main starting points of the discussions between the two countries to implement a reform programme.

However, Bond pointed out that security sector reform is a problem in several other countries, hence why it became an issue in Guyana is no surprise. “But I think there is a certain need remaining to loo at some of those big questions. I know there is work going on at the moment, which is good… obviously, we hope that the (Guyana) government’s current plans and activities will bear fruit,” he said. “Reform programmes have to have a very strong ‘buy in’ by the government that is implementing it because, at the end of the day, a foreign agency can’t implement a reform, it has to be the government and the stakeholders locally, who will implement it,” Bond said. However, he acknowledged that there are other programmes currently being conducted in that area, making specific reference to the Citizen Security Programme funded by the Inter American Development Bank (IDB). Bond said that the UK government is hopeful that these programmes ‘pay benefits’ to Guyana’s security sector.

After the outbreak o criminal violence in 2002, the government of Guyana had approached the British government for security assistance. After several years of negotiations and consultations between the two countries, a Security Sector Reform Programme (SSRP) was drafted in 2006. The main sticking point in the collapse of the SSRP was Guyana’s insistence on retaining ownership of the project. Head of the Presidential Secretariat, Dr Roger Luncheon, had said the British government’s withdrawal of the project was “regrettable”, noting that from the trend of the negotiations, it had been expected that there would have been approval and implementation.

Among other things, the project had propose to build the operational capacity of the Guyana Police Force, from the provision of a uniformed response to serious crime, to forensics, crime intelligence and traffic policing; strengthenin policy-making across the security sector to make i more transparent, effective, and better co-ordinated; mainstreaming financial management in the security sector into public sector financial management reform; creating substantial parliamentary and other oversight of the security sector and building greater public participation and inclusiveness on security sector issues. Additionally, the UK had said that the wide-ranging approach was very deliberate, as the plan was specifically designed to build on and complement other current activity here, particularly the Citizen Security and Justice Reform programmes. The plan was to be implemented over four years.

Source

Now Uncle Henry, the following are news items over the past two days:

$6.9M robbery on Camp St
By STABROEK EDITOR |
LOCAL NEWS | FRIDAY, JULY 1, 2011

The police are investigating a $6.9M armed robbery that occurred at about 0900h. today at Beauty and Home System Inc; Camp Street, Georgetown, during which clerk Donald Joseph, 30 years, and bond clerk Gavin McKenzie, 29 years, were attacked and robbed by a man armed with a firearm.

Investigations revealed that the two employees were about to enter a motor vehicle to take monies to the Bank when the armed man confronted them and held them at gunpoint. The man then took away two bags containing a total of $6.9 million and escaped on a motor cycle driven by an accomplice.

Source


Cove and John woman dies after being hit by police vehicle - four others injured
By STABROEK STAFF |
LOCAL NEWS | SATURDAY, JULY 2, 2011

A police vehicle was involved in a horrific accident on the Enmore public road yesterday which resulted in the death of a woman and injuries to four other persons.

Shantranie Sookdeo, 68, of Station Road, Cove and John, East Coast Demerara died at the scene of the accident. She was waiting on a bus to go home after leaving the Enmore market a few minutes prior to the accident. Reports are that the driver of the vehicle attempted to overtake another and lost control, slamming into two pedestrians before toppling. It toppled a second time then hit Shantrine Sookdeo and crashed into a utility pole, before coming to a halt in a drain.


Shantranie Sookdeo

The injured were rushed to Georgetown Public Hospital and among them were Lucille Abrams, 38 of Enmore, East Coast Demerara; Fitzroy Blackett, 22, of Mahaica, East Coast Demerara, and Police Constables Jones and Reece. Abrams was nursing injuries to her neck, back, legs and shoulders and, according to relatives, she was in tremendous pain. Minutes after she arrived at the hospital, doctors fitted her with a neck brace. The police constables were said to have been nursing minor injuries.

Unreal

Gruesome details of the accident, which occurred around 2:30pm, were relayed by an eye-witness who described it as “unreal.” Though there are two versions of what happened, persons who assembled at the scene faulted the police and many openly criticized the driver of the vehicle.

There are reports that the police vehicle, which was travelling east along the public road, hit the pedestrians after a near collision with a canter truck. According to this version, the police saw the truck coming and swerved to avoid the collision but ended up slamming into the people standing on the road at the time. But Sookdeo and Abrams were on opposite sides of the road; one woman was waiting on a bus to the city and the other was going home in the direction of Cove and John and according to an eye-witness, the canter-truck “had nothing to do with the accident.”

The witness, who requested anonymity, told Stabroek News that the police vehicle was travelling at a fast rate when the driver attempted to overtake the other vehicle and lost control. The vehicle hit Abrams and Blackett before it toppled a second time and hit Sookdeo. Sookdeo was pinned to the pole and after persons rushed over to assist her, they realized that the impact was so severe bits of her flesh were on the post. Sookdeo’s legs were also crushed beyond recognition and she reportedly suffered head injuries, among other injuries. “It was unreal…this woman was hurt really bad. People hear the impact with her from corners away and when you look at her you could see that she get hit hard,” the eye-witness said of Sookdeo.

Police issued a press release on the accident saying the driver of police vehicle, Constable Jones had attempted to overtake another vehicle when he was confronted with an oncoming vehicle and swerved to avoid a collision. As a result, the police said Sookdeo, Blackett and Abrams were hit. According to the police, the vehicle then stuck a utility pole and turned turtle. Constable Reece said he had no idea what happened when he was approached at the hospital. “I was asleep and I don’t remember anything,” he related.

Wrong

Many persons publicly expressed outrage over the accident at the hospital yesterday saying the police were wrong and as a result Sookdeo lost her life. “I never see police reach on a accident scene suh fast yet,” a woman said, noting that she rushed from her home, after hearing the impact, to find the injured lying on the road. She said police were at the scene “quick time” and started to assist the injured. However, Sookdeo was left lying on the road for a while.

Persons at the scene called for the police to investigate the accident without any prejudice, and for the family of the dead woman to “get justice.” Basanti Harriprashad, Sookdeo’s sister, wept uncontrollably for about twenty minutes after watching her sister’s body being wheeled out of the hospital compound to the mortuary. She told Stabroek News that Sookdeo left home for market and was waiting to go home when “they tek she from we.” The woman said her sister was going to celebrate her birthday later this month. The woman leaves five children to mourn; one daughter and four sons.

Source


Speeding car kills 61-yr-old Lindener
JULY 2, 2011 | BY KNEWS | FILED UNDER NEWS

An accident early yesterday morning involving a pedal cyclist and a car (wagon) PKK 3831 has left a 61-year-old Linden man dead, and his wife and family totally devastated Dead is Carl Bentick, of 1194 Amelia’s Ward, Linden, who was on his way to work on his bicycle at approximately 7:30 hrs, when he was hit from behind by a car on the Linden Highway, in the vicinity of the Old Guyana Stores building. The car was reportedly speeding.

Some reports indicated that the car that hit Gilbert skidded some 120 yards after and seemed out of control. According to the man’s wife, Joy Gilbert-Bentick, her husband had left her only a few minutes earlier. Scores of persons converged at the scene of the accident, to view the man’s badly mangled body. A pool of blood congealed in the early morning sun where his body lay. His bicycle, or what was left of it, was pitched clear over the parapet and nearby drain.

Joy Gilbert was inconsolable. “Ow God, is why you do me dis?” she wailed over and over. “Is wha they gon tell me now? That he was drunk, and ride in de path o de car? That is what they does always seh, when de knock down big people; that he been under the influence o alcohol? Oh God is 34 years we together.”

Gilbert said that she received a call from a friend, informing her about the accident, and that she immediately called her husband’s mobile phone, but a friend of his, answered. “So I seh is wheh Carl, and he said is who, so I seh Joy, and he seh wait, I gon call yo back. Right away I start shiver, and I ask he wha happen to Carl, and he seh he get knock down by Guyana Stores”. Gilbert added that her husband had gone to work by car on the two days preceding his death, but yesterday opted to ride his bicycle.

The distraught woman, between sobs, related that one of her sons got killed on the one Mile Public road in 1983. He was seven years old at the time. Two children who were recently killed on that very road were buried last Wednesday. Like Carl Bentick, the children were riding a bicycle when they met their demise. This latest fatality has led a few persons to point out, “Riding a bicycle on these Linden roads with these speeding drivers is a dangerous thing to do!’

That sentiment was echoed repeatedly. In recent years quite a few pedal cyclist have lost their lives on the roads here. Almost half a dozen, were children. Residents have time and again expressed dissatisfaction, with the way many motorist here use the roads. “Some o dem does think de deh pon de Timehri racing circuit”, persons would often comment, after a vehicle would fly past.
Carl Bentick was a quiet, easy going person, and never rode his bicycle fast, according to his niece Keisha Bentick. She said she saw him two weeks ago. Bentick leaves to mourn his wife and several children. He was a construction worker. The driver of the car that killed him, is a well known mechanic in the Amelia’s Ward Area. He was taken into police custody and is assisting with investigations.

Source


Grandma, 72, executed in home
JULY 1, 2011 | BY KNEWS | FILED UNDER NEWS


Murdered: 72-year-old Clementine Parris

Two gunmen walked into the Robb Street Bourda property of a 72-year-old grandmother at around 19:45 hrs last night and riddled her with bullets before fleeing in a car. Clementine Parris, also known as Clementine Fiedtkou, of Lot 42 Robb Street Bourda (between Light and Cummings Street), was shot twice under the armpit, once in the chest and once in the back by one of the gunmen who was standing by the front door. She died shortly after being rushed to the Georgetown Public Hospital Corporation (GPHC).

Robbery was clearly not a motive, since the killers did not even attempt to enter the building, and relatives are certain that she was the victim of a cold-blooded execution. “This was no robbery, this was a hit,” a distraught sister wailed at the scene.
Police recovered a warhead that was embedded in a wall of the victim’s home. While relatives said that Mrs. Parris, known as ‘Paro’ and ‘Sister Parris’, had no enemies, they disclosed that she was embroiled in a prolonged and bitter property dispute.

Eyewitnesses said that the gunmen, who appeared to be extremely young, fled west up Robb Street in a silver-grey car. The vehicle reportedly turned north into Cummings Street. Kaieteur News was also told that persons fitting the description of the gunmen were seen ‘circling the area’ in the same car for two consecutive days before the execution.


The slain woman’s home

The brutal killing was witnessed by the victim’s brother, Fitzroy Fiedtkou, who was on the front step when the gunmen struck. He lives in a house behind his sister’s, but had reportedly gone over to his sibling’s home for a meal. Another male relative was also in the house at the time. A shaken Mr. Fiedtkou said that he was sitting on the front step at around 19:45 hrs when two young men entered the yard and began to climb the stairs. “They say, ‘where auntie?’ and I ask ‘who auntie?’ and they say, ‘auntie, nuh.’”
According to the brother, one of the men then ordered him to ‘get up.’ “I say, why I got to get up, I got a bad foot’, and he (one of the men) put his hand around me and lift me up.” He said that just then, his sister came out of her bedroom and stepped into the hallway. Mr. Fiedtkou said that the same intruder who had grabbed him then drew a handgun from his waist and shot his sister.

The elderly man said that he grabbed the gunman’s hand but the killer’s accomplice shoved him. The gunmen then ran out of the yard and drove away in a nearby car Mr. Fiedtkou said that he immediately ran outside and summoned a taxi driver who was parked near Robb and Light Streets. They then took the seriously injured woman to the GPHC where she died shortly after.

Several relatives and close friends converged outside the slain woman’s house for some three hours while detectives and crime scene ranks questioned Mr. Fiedtkou and searched inside the house for clues. One friend described her as a regular churchgoer who had attended Bible classes the night before she was slain. A sister of the victim disclosed that the family had brought the property over 40 years ago. While not identifying the perpetrators, relatives indicated that Mrs. Parris had received several threats. Some of the relatives said that they were concerned for her safety and had pleaded with her to move out. Mrs. Parris has two children and grandchildren who all live overseas.

Source


One shot in Corentyne piracy spike
Written by Demerara Waves
Saturday, 02 July 2011 22:38


One of the recovered boats

One fisherman is nursing gunshot wounds and several others fear for their lives because of four pirates wreaking havoc in the Corentyne, Berbice area. The sudden spike in piracy since Thursday has triggered concerns from the Guyana government. At least 10 boats were hijacked and 37 sailors captured by masked and armed pirates. The hijackers reportedly took the captains to neighbouring Suriname.

Boat owner, Steven Baldeo said he and five other persons were attacked in the vicinity of the Number 43 channel. There, the attackers opened fire, injuring his father, Andrew Baldeo. They and captains and crew members were taken to Paramaribo River, Suriname and ordered into a boat with little fuel and told to get back to Guyana by any means necessary. On their return, Baldeo was rushed to the New Amsterdam Hospital.

Several boats were left adrift, many having been recovered without their engines. Fuel, seine and other items were also carted off by the pirates. The Ministry of Agriculture said it has received reports that three boats fishing between Eversham and Bush Lot, East Berbice were allegedly hijacked on Friday as criminals took engines, equipment and catch. According to statements received from fishermen, crew members were left in their boats adrift and were rescued and taken to Copename, Suriname.

The ministry announced that the Fisheries Department is in contact with the Guyana Police Force and the Coast Guard. Expressing "concern over the recent spate of hijacking," Agriculture Minister Robert Persaud noted that the incidents have occurred at a time when several events are being hosted in recognition of Fisherfolks' Day to acknowledge their hard work and contribution to the economy. He last month summoned a special meeting of the Fisheries Advisory Committee to discuss issues regarding the safety of fisherfolks at sea and to identify ways to combat the piracy scourge.

The Committee consists of stakeholders from the various fishing cooperatives, the Coast Guard, the police, Maritime Administration, Foreign Affairs, Attorney General's Chambers, University of Guyana, Private Trawlers Association and the agriculture ministry.

Source


Bandits snatch money bags with GUY$20 million
Written by Demerara Waves
Saturday, 02 July 2011 18:57

In what appears to be targeted attacks on big businesses, armed robbers raked in more than GUY$20 million when they held up a security company’s armed escort- the second multi-million dollar grab in seven hours.

The Guyana Police Force did not release the names of the businesses whose monies were stolen but Demerara Waves Online News ( www.demwaves.com ) was told that the cash was collected by RK’s Security Services from five Lucky Dollar branches, Courts and David Persaud Investments. Demerara Waves Online was also told by an official of one of the affected companies that RK's Security Services has already decided to replace the cash stolen.

Police spokesman, Ivelaw Whittaker said the robbery occurred around 5:40 Friday afternoon on Lombard Street, Georgetown. The two RKs Security Services guards were attacked and robbed by two men armed with firearms. Investigators were told that two security guards were escorting a sum of cash in two deposit bags when the vehicle they were travelling in was forced to stop by another motor vehicle which drove across their path. Whittaker said the two armed perpetrators then exited the vehicle and held up the two guards and took away the armed guard's service .32 revolver and six rounds and the bags with the money and escaped in their vehicle.

That incident followed a GUY$6.9 million robbery Friday around 9 AM at the Avon’s agent - Beauty and Home System Inc.- located on Camp Street, Georgetown. In that incident Clerk, Donald Joseph and Bond Clerk Gavin McKenzie were attacked and robbed by a man armed with a firearm. Police said they learnt that the two employees were about to enter a motor vehicle to take monies to a bank when the armed man confronted them and held them at gunpoint The man then took away two bags containing the cash and escaped on a motor cycle driven by an accomplice.

Police have said the robberies were committed by the same perpetrators.

Source

And your point is? If only the Brits were running Guyana, these things could never happen?

quote:

Originally posted by Henry:
And your point is? If only the Brits were running Guyana, these things could never happen?

This is my point: “Security Sector Reform will continue in Guyana, maybe at a different pace and the scope and the design will be different but the implementation of that will be from public funds from the Government of Guyana,” Dr. Luncheon said.

That was uttered in 2009, and look at what obtains today. All the above articles were within the past two days.

And Uncle Henry, with all due respect, but what a ridiculous statement to attribute to me when I said I was in agreement with you on the Jamaica thread: http://guyanafriends.com/eve/f...604972/m/21520961051 How did I give you the impression that I am in agreement with the British to "take over"?

National Security and Crime - AFC Action Plan

Crime solutions are vital to the revival of the nation. Crime is stifling genuine investment opportunities, affecting the well-being of the working people and is one of the principal contributors to the skilled human capital migrating from Guyana. The increase of deadly crimes under the current administration has seen very few criminals brought to justice.

General Strategies - The AFC plans to confront organised crime and redress the breakdown of law and order by:
1. Increasing substantially law enforcement officers’ salaries;
2. Giving the DEA permission to set up a local facility;
3. Re-engaging the British, USA and other friendly Governments for technical and financial assistance to reform the Joint Services;
4. Removing corrupt officers from the Joint Services;
5. Mandating a jail term of life in prison after three convictions for violent felonies;
6. Extraditing drug kingpins and terrorists;
7. Putting more police officers on the street by hiring civilians for desk work;
8. Boosting the efficiency, operation and powers of the Police Complaints Authority to ensure that all complaints are brought to a finality and make it accessible to citizens;
9. Facilitating a system that would allow members of the Joint Services to work in the administrative region of their choice where practical;
10. Establishing a Group of Forensic Auditors to reduce corruption and white color crimes and facilitate civilian oversight.

Strategy Number One: Empowering Agencies and Institutions
1. Establish a Ministry of Justice and National Security (MJNS) to better coordinate all aspects of public safety, border security, and public order;
2. Develop a National Security Strategy (NSS);
3. Appoint a specialised Anti-Crime Unit (ACU) comprising GDF and GPF personnel in all Police Divisions and to be headed by a GDF officer on secondment to confront violent and armed criminals;
4. Establish a unified Drug Enforcement and Control Agency (DECA) to coordinate and execute drug enforcement policy between the Customs Anti- Narcotic Unit (CANU), the Police Anti-Narcotic Unit (PANU), DEA, INTERPOL and other agencies;
5. Establish a specialised Law Enforcement Academy (LEA) to train officers in crime investigation, intelligence gathering and forensics;
6. Create a special office within the Chambers of the Director of Public Prosecutions for the use of Special Prosecutors to prosecute persons accused of certain categories of offences;
7. Start the Police/Schools partnership program by assigning a dedicated officer to each school with whom they can work on “Get to know the Police” workshops, etc;
8. Construct a modern prison with new, appropriate and humane facilities for women, juveniles and remand prisoners outside of the city;
9. Allow more prisoners to do community work and provide a nominal stipend at the end of their term;
10. Develop rehabilitation programmes in prisons and provide academic education, vocational and technical training for prisoners to better prepare them for reintegration into society.
11. Review the station bail and remand system and procedures.

Strategy Number Two: Legislation
1. Introduce legislation to legitimize and regulate Community Policing and establish Citizens Protection Units (CPUs) in keeping with best practices globally;
2. Review and consolidate all criminal law and criminal procedure related legislation;
3. Implement an amnesty programme for the surrender of illegal weapons, which will be backed by a “Voluntary Weapons Collection” programme;
4. The Amnesty programme will be accompanied by a special fund to provide alternative opportunities for training, development of income generating projects, credit etc. for youth at risk and sports, scouting, and other cadet-like schemes for youth in schools and religious organizations;
5. Pass Legislation to establish neighbourhood justice panels of village elders to adjudicate on petty matters such as anti-social behaviour and family disputes to free up the court’s time for more serious matters.

Strategy Number Three: Strengthening Security Services
1. Furnish police with the tools to fight crime including advanced weapons, mobile communications, transportation, forensic laboratory, fingerprint/criminal behavioural database, and other necessary material;
2. Raise entry requirements and remuneration and develop innovative recruitment strategies in order to attract a new generation of professional law enforcement officers;
3. Overhaul the 911 System to make it responsive to the needs of citizens;
4. Train Police to respond more effectively to domestic violence;
5. Contract out administrative duties not related to crime fighting to independent agencies through a series of transparent bidding processes or transfer them to other Government Agencies, freeing police officers to fight crime;
6. Fund the University of Guyana and other institutions of learning to continuously assess the changes and developments within the society that influence crime and recommend approaches to confronting them;
7. Complete the implementation of recommendations of the Disciplined Forces Commission, Symonds Group Report, and CARICOM Task Force on Crime & Security Report;
8. Embark on a public awareness programme to educate the public on their responsibilities to society and the penalties when laws are transgressed;
9. Commence multilateral negotiations within CARICOM and other willing countries, to support a Witness Protection, Security and Benefit Programme (WPSBP);
10. Establish the Police Air Unit at the Ogle International Airport.

Source

Lies lies and more lies spread by those with political motives and a wish to be bent over by the white mass for a good reaming.

Even in the article posted with fictitious edits the reason was clearly stated by Luncheon:

quote:

“Their insistence in installing in their design in April, (comprise) management features,
seriously compromise Guyana’s ownership and when our new design re-established ownership
that was more consistent with our notions of sovereignty, the plug was pulled.

It was the British that pulled the plug when Luncheon insisted on Guyanese ownership of the plan as opposed to British management. hahahhaha

As the Gov't continues to dally on our security...

“AK-47” ammunition found at Haags/Bosch dumpsite
JULY 3, 2011 | BY KNEWS | FILED UNDER NEWS


The 111 rounds of AK-47 ammunition

A discovery of 111 rounds of ’7.62′ by ’39′ ammunition was made some time yesterday at the Haags/ Bosch dumpsite, Eccles Industrial Site, East Bank Demerara after garbage collectors began dumping their loads of refuse.

Reports are that shortly after 10:00hrs, workmen on the site found the rounds which were secured in black plastic bags. It was suggested that there might have been a raid by the police and the persons who had these rounds in their possession probably “stashed” the items in a garbage bin. Before they could retrieve the ammunition the garbage collectors had already begun picking up refuse for disposal at the dumpsite.

Source

quote:

Originally posted by BGurd_See:
Lies lies and more lies spread by those with political motives and a wish to be bent over by the white mass for a good reaming.

Even in the article posted with fictitious edits the reason was clearly stated by Luncheon:

quote:

“Their insistence in installing in their design in April, (comprise) management features,
seriously compromise Guyana’s ownership and when our new design re-established ownership
that was more consistent with our notions of sovereignty, the plug was pulled.

It was the British that pulled the plug when Luncheon insisted on Guyanese ownership of the plan as opposed to British management. hahahhaha

But the good Dr Luncheon provided no details, “It is tempting to believe that this about-face from the December 2008 joint agreement to what happened in the middle of 2009 might have been associated with some decision that the Guyanese Government made with request for training by the UK Special Forces, on a Western Border location with live firing to which the Government was unprepared to support.”

quote:

Originally posted by Henry:
The various comments by Luncheon suggest that there was more at stake than just a live-fire exercise. The Brits are not known for their altruism in foreign policy. There is usually a hidden agenda.

Indeed they suggest as such, by why are no specific details forthcoming?

quote:

Originally posted by Gerhard Ramsaroop:
As the Gov't continues to dally on our security...

“AK-47” ammunition found at Haags/Bosch dumpsite
JULY 3, 2011 | BY KNEWS | FILED UNDER NEWS


The 111 rounds of AK-47 ammunition

A discovery of 111 rounds of ’7.62′ by ’39′ ammunition was made some time yesterday at the Haags/ Bosch dumpsite, Eccles Industrial Site, East Bank Demerara after garbage collectors began dumping their loads of refuse.

Reports are that shortly after 10:00hrs, workmen on the site found the rounds which were secured in black plastic bags. It was suggested that there might have been a raid by the police and the persons who had these rounds in their possession probably “stashed” the items in a garbage bin. Before they could retrieve the ammunition the garbage collectors had already begun picking up refuse for disposal at the dumpsite.

Source

Or you could see this from a different perspective, the pressure by security forces are forcing the criminal supported by a small 2 seat party to ditch their ammunition. hahahhaha

quote:

Originally posted by Gerhard Ramsaroop:
But the good Dr Luncheon provided no details, “It is tempting to believe that this about-face from the December 2008 joint agreement to what happened in the middle of 2009 might have been associated with some decision that the Guyanese Government made with request for training by the UK Special Forces, on a Western Border location with live firing to which the Government was unprepared to support.”

The aFC can request a copy of the agreement from GOG and British, in fact the British have FOI act, why don't you folks get a copy from them? hahahha

Gerhard,

Thank you for starting this thread. Let the people see how dangerous the choices of Ramotar = Jagdeo has been for the people.

quote:

Originally posted by BGurd_See:

quote:

Originally posted by Gerhard Ramsaroop:
But the good Dr Luncheon provided no details, “It is tempting to believe that this about-face from the December 2008 joint agreement to what happened in the middle of 2009 might have been associated with some decision that the Guyanese Government made with request for training by the UK Special Forces, on a Western Border location with live firing to which the Government was unprepared to support.”

The aFC can request a copy of the agreement from GOG and British, in fact the British have FOI act, why don't you folks get a copy from them? hahahha

Oh, we know why the project collapsed. The PPP wanted no oversight. It is you and Uncle Henry who are saying otherwise, so the onus is on you two to provide the specifics that exonerate the PPP.

quote:

Originally posted by TK_REDUX:
Gerhard,

Thank you for starting this thread. Let the people see how dangerous the choices of Ramotar = Jagdeo has been for the people.

Good to see you TK

In 1992 the PPP decided to do nothing with security. Then they REFUSED to reform again with help from the ABC countries. Why? They are now talking about a forensic lab after 19 years. This is a disaster to the people.

Gerhard bhai...ah tryin!

quote:

Originally posted by TK_REDUX:
Gerhard bhai...ah tryin!

Glad you're back bro. Ah give Liz a good run Friday

quote:

Originally posted by Gerhard Ramsaroop:Oh, we know why the project collapsed. The PPP wanted no oversight. It is you and Uncle Henry who are saying otherwise, so the onus is on you two to provide the specifics that exonerate the PPP.

how do you know? Post the agreement and gain some credibility instead of making up story as you go along. But then again Ramjattan made a few blunders himself in parliament, so it is to be expected that his underlings would follow in his footsteps. hahahhha

Gerhard you notice Liz is missing in action since Fri? Expect some new members popping up soon.

quote:

Originally posted by TK_REDUX:
Gerhard you notice Liz is missing in action since Fri? Expect some new members popping up soon.

Or old handles resurrected We'll be ready for them.

quote:

Originally posted by BGurd_See:

quote:

Originally posted by Gerhard Ramsaroop:Oh, we know why the project collapsed. The PPP wanted no oversight. It is you and Uncle Henry who are saying otherwise, so the onus is on you two to provide the specifics that exonerate the PPP.

how do you know? Post the agreement and gain some credibility instead of making up story as you go along. But then again Ramjattan made a few blunders himself in parliament, so it is to be expected that his underlings would follow in his footsteps. hahahhha

The PPP's track record speaks for itself. And everyone knows if the British had made unreasonable demands the Gov't would have long publicised them, and not given a vague and rambling answer such as this, "It is tempting to believe that this about-face from the December 2008 joint agreement to what happened in the middle of 2009 might have been associated with some decision that the Guyanese Government made with request for training by the UK Special Forces, on a Western Border location with live firing to which the Government was unprepared to support.”

Bless your little soul BGurd_See, with Liz gone into hiding how else would I be able to get my points across?

quote:

Originally posted by Gerhard Ramsaroop:
The PPP's track record speaks for itself. And everyone knows if the British had made unreasonable demands the Gov't would have long publicised them, and not given a vague and rambling answer such as this, "It is tempting to believe that this about-face from the December 2008 joint agreement to what happened in the middle of 2009 might have been associated with some decision that the Guyanese Government made with request for training by the UK Special Forces, on a Western Border location with live firing to which the Government was unprepared to support.”

Bless your little soul BGurd_See, with Liz gone into hiding how else would I be able to get my points across?

You have no argument, your evidence is conjecture like " The PPP's track record speaks for itself . And you expect to be taken seriously by the electorate? No wonder your party's functions are always poorly attended. You people are uninspiring and has no concrete argument against the PPP. That is why the aFC will lose their few seats come election day.

quote:

Originally posted by BGurd_See:

quote:

Originally posted by Gerhard Ramsaroop:
The PPP's track record speaks for itself. And everyone knows if the British had made unreasonable demands the Gov't would have long publicised them, and not given a vague and rambling answer such as this, "It is tempting to believe that this about-face from the December 2008 joint agreement to what happened in the middle of 2009 might have been associated with some decision that the Guyanese Government made with request for training by the UK Special Forces, on a Western Border location with live firing to which the Government was unprepared to support.”

Bless your little soul BGurd_See, with Liz gone into hiding how else would I be able to get my points across?

You have no argument, your evidence is conjecture like " The PPP's track record speaks for itself . And you expect to be taken seriously by the electorate? No wonder your party's functions are always poorly attended. You people are uninspiring and has no concrete argument against the PPP. That is why the aFC will lose their few seats come election day.

Wow, you are such a boon to me!

Ok, I repeat, if the PPP had concrete evidence of unreasonable demands by the British, they would have published it over and over, and not say this: "It is tempting to believe that this about-face from the December 2008 joint agreement to what happened in the middle of 2009 might have been associated with some decision that the Guyanese Government made with request for training by the UK Special Forces, on a Western Border location with live firing to which the Government was unprepared to support.”

If the camoudi wants to embrace you, I say refuse without first asking to see evidence of bad intentions.

quote:

Originally posted by Henry:
If the camoudi wants to embrace you, I say refuse without first asking to see evidence of bad intentions.

So, Uncle Henry, it is only now you're waking up to the fact that it's been a camoudi you've been dealing with all these years? Wow what a slumber!!!

"Security cooperation between Guyana and Britain never ceased during this period (2006-2008). The International Policing Adviser for Latin America and the Caribbean spearheaded a task force from the National Policing Improvement Agency International Academy at Bramshill and the Scottish Police College to begin to implement the Security Sector Reform Action Plan. The international department of the Scottish Police College, which provides learning and development opportunities in operational policing, police leadership and performance management and Centrex − the trading name of the Central Police Training and Development Authority which was subsumed within the new National Policing Improvement Agency − have been involved with local police problems and programmes for a long time.

The Scottish Police College, in particular, has executed several projects since 2004. Starting with a scoping exercise to assess the Police Force’s training requirements in December 2004, it then conducted a series of management training programmes in February-June 2005; an assessment of the impact of the previously delivered training programmes in December 2005; and another scoping exercise in May 2006. Those were followed in June 2006 by the presentation of the Guyana Police Force Strategic Plan in partnership with the Inter-American Development Bank as part of the Guyana Citizens Security Programme. It also executed a project to assess the police force’s operational capability in October 2007.

British consultants from the Police Service of Northern Ireland also continued to work with the Police Force to help develop crime intelligence, advise on structures, provide training and conduct a needs analysis for the setting-up of the new, expanded Criminal Intelligence Unit, in March 2008 under the Interim Memorandum of Understanding.

It seemed evident that the type of organisation and level of administration required to support the reform process might have been underestimated. In fact, even before the troubles on the East Coast had erupted, and in response to the GUYANA GOVERNMENT’S SPECIFIC REQUEST in 2000, the United Kingdom Department for International Development had commissioned a strategic review of the Guyana Police Force which produced the comprehensive Guyana Police Reform Programme, conducted by the Symonds Group Limited.

Known locally as the Symonds’ Report, it was aimed at helping the force’s senior management to determine the functions of an accountable, professional force; developing a community-based policing style; and helping the government to identify the areas to strengthen performance, accountability and community orientation of the Force. The establishment of a witness protection programme and better management of information, particularly with regard to fighting narco-trafficking, were also recommended.

For most of the past seven years, the Guyana Government has been receiving British Government assistance to reform the security sector and to support the improvement of the Police Force’s capability. The efficiency of the British public safety establishments which have been so frequently involved in advising and training the Police Force has not been disputed. But it was always up to the Guyana Government to implement the policy recommendations which have been made."

Source

quote:

Originally posted by Henry:
If the camoudi wants to embrace you, I say refuse without first asking to see evidence of bad intentions.

Refuse it in such a wishy-washy manner? I thought the PPP'd come out swinging...but this?

"It is tempting to believe that this about-face from the December 2008 joint agreement to what happened in the middle of 2009 might have been associated with some decision that the Guyanese Government made with request for training by the UK Special Forces, on a Western Border location with live firing to which the Government was unprepared to support.”

quote:

Originally posted by Gerhard Ramsaroop:

quote:

Originally posted by Henry:
If the camoudi wants to embrace you, I say refuse without first asking to see evidence of bad intentions.

So, Uncle Henry, it is only now you're waking up to the fact that it's been a camoudi you've been dealing with all these years? Wow what a slumber!!!

Uncle Henry, why is your silence so deafening?

First of all, as a courtesy to other participants, I try to keep my number of daily posts below 150. Secondly, it seems that you misunderstood my comment about the camoudi and have churned out a great deal of irrelevant verbiage, providing me with nothing concrete to which I may respond.

quote:

Originally posted by Gerhard Ramsaroop:
Wow, you are such a boon to me!

Ok, I repeat, if the PPP had concrete evidence of unreasonable demands by the British, they would have published it over and over, and not say this: "It is tempting to believe that this about-face from the December 2008 joint agreement to what happened in the middle of 2009 might have been associated with some decision that the Guyanese Government made with request for training by the UK Special Forces, on a Western Border location with live firing to which the Government was unprepared to support.”

They did publish their objection to the British attempted recolonization of the GPF. You chose not to believe. Ask the British to provide you with their version of the proposal and prove us wrong. hahahhhaha

quote:

Originally posted by Henry:
First of all, as a courtesy to other participants, I try to keep my number of daily posts below 150. Secondly, it seems that you misunderstood my comment about the camoudi and have churned out a great deal of irrelevant verbiage, providing me with nothing concrete to which I may respond.

Really? First off, is there a limit to comments on a forum? Secondly, seeing you are being so "courteous", how about you explain what you meant about the camoudi tomorrow? Deal, Uncle Henry?

Sure looks like a lot of counting is going on today.

quote:

Originally posted by BGurd_See:

quote:

Originally posted by Gerhard Ramsaroop:
Wow, you are such a boon to me!

Ok, I repeat, if the PPP had concrete evidence of unreasonable demands by the British, they would have published it over and over, and not say this: "It is tempting to believe that this about-face from the December 2008 joint agreement to what happened in the middle of 2009 might have been associated with some decision that the Guyanese Government made with request for training by the UK Special Forces, on a Western Border location with live firing to which the Government was unprepared to support.”

They did publish their objection to the British attempted recolonization of the GPF. You chose not to believe. Ask the British to provide you with their version of the proposal and prove us wrong. hahahhhaha

Really? I would really love to see the specifics of the "British recolonisation". Since you know about it, please point me in the their direction. Thanks

At the end of the day a mendicant government REFUSED possibly the most important piece of foreign assistance. Why? What do they have to hide?