By Prior Beharry
THE Police Service Commission (PolSC) has until midday today (Sunday) to withdraw its letter suspending Gary Griffith as police commissioner.
If not, Griffith intends to take legal action.
In a letter on Friday, Griffith was told not to return to duty until the investigation instituted by the PolSC was being condcuted. That investigation is being conducted by retired justice of appeal Stanley John into allegations of corruption in the issuance of Firearm User’s Licences.
The letter signed by PolSC chairman Bliss Seepersad told Griffith not to report to duty “until further notice” since it was not in the public interest or that of the police service to have Griffith on the job while Justice John was conducting his investigation.
In his legal letter on Saturday, Griffith asked that his suspension letter be immediately withdrawn claiming it was illegal, irrational and in breach of the rules of natural justice, null, void and of no legal effect.
Griffith said no correspondence has informed him that he was subject of any of the investigations or that there is any allegation of wrongdoing made against him in his capacity as commissioner.
He said he has been contacted by Justice John and provided him with all assistance, given him access to relevant information and facilitated him in interviewing officers.
Griffith said, “However, at no time did he make, or ask me to respond to, any allegations whatsoever against me or the performance of the functions of my office.”
He attached a letter from Justice John that stated, “I wish to reiterate that my remit does not involve an investigation into your good self as COP (Acting) …”
Therefore, Griffith said he was not under any investigation by Justice John.
He said, “I wish to respectfully draw to the Commission’s attention that the letter of September 17, 2021 is crystal clear that the Commission made its decision to suspend me on the basis of the investigation which it ordered to be conducted by Justice John.
“That is the sole basis on which the Commission purportedly exercised its powers to suspend me in the purported interest of the Police Service and in the public interest.
“The letter of September 17, 2021, pellucidly demonstrates that the Commission mistakenly persuaded itself that the Stanley John investigation in and of itself, is a basis for suspending me.
“Justice John, in the said letter, has informed me that the remit of his investigation does not include an investigation into me as COP.
“As such, the entire basis upon which the Commission purported to act and exercise the power of suspension has been wholly, entirely and irretrievably undermined.
“The Commission must have known that the remit of Justice John’s investigation did not include any investigation into me as COP.
“As such, when it purported to exercise the power of suspension, it knew fully well that the suspension was done outside of the remit of Justice John’s investigation.
“Therefore, the Commission had no jurisdiction to suspend me on the basis of this investigation. The Commission’s decision was an illegality, irrational and in breach of the rules of natural justice, null, void and of no legal effect.
“In the circumstances, I call upon the Commission to withdraw immediately, the letter of suspension, because on its face, having regard to the contents of the Stanley John letter dated September 18 2021, same has been shown to be null and void and of no effect.”
Griffith said he has retained a team of lawyers headed by Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj, SC, together with Jagdeo Singh, Larry Lalla, Alvin Ramroop and Kristy Mohan.
He said, “Based on the legal advice I have obtained, unless the Commission withdraws this letter by Sunday 19, September 2021 at 12 noon, an application for judicial review will be filed against the Commission for the Court to declare the suspension null, void and of no legal effect and for the Court to grant interim relief to stay the suspension until such time as the claim is determined by the High Court.
“In the event that it becomes necessary for me to apply to the High Court for relief, please treat this letter as a Pre-Action Protocol Letter issued in compliance with the provisions of the Civil Proceedings Rules 1998.”
