LETTER: Nothing is wrong with appointment of Special Constables

10
Screenshot

Dear Editor,

Kindly allow me to address a public concern through your platform.

I’m concerned that people who know better continue to spew unnecessary rhetoric for political gain, and therefore ask the public to pick sense from nonsense.

A while ago, former Commissioner of Police Mr. Rawlston Pompey raised some concerns about the latest batch of police officers being appointed as ‘Special Constables’, and ever since, several public figures have decried the action as some sort of administrative error of massive scale. And while I cannot speak to the intentions of the current Commissioner of Police, or the Attorney General, allow me to state some facts that will lay some context for the alleged fiasco:

The cohort of course 49 were appointed as ‘Special Constables’ in April 2024, about the time that they would have commenced training. Traditionally, what happens is that they are brought in as full Police Officers (with all the duties, responsibilities and immunities of a Police Officer in full effect), and then undergo training. As special constables, however, they are limited in their responsibilities, duties, and immunities, and must be under the command, or supervision, of a Police Officer; a situation that is ideal for a training environment. What can therefore be deduced is that the powers that be sought to restrict the full powers of a police officer until after they would have completed their training.

By comparison, military recruits have limited duties, responsibilities and immunities compared to regular soldiers. They are also administratively treated differently than regular soldiers, and can be more easily terminated if they do not meet training criteria. Similarly, Special Constables can be discharged at any time, unlike full Police Officers, who are Public Servants and are protected by regulations. How then, would the police dismiss a recruit who fails to meet the standard while on training, if that recruit is already a Police Officer, protected by the Public Service and Police Service Commissions from arbitrary termination. 

The public tirade in the media against an administrative change that is objectively better than the established system is reprehensible, and reeks of a desperate reach for political ammunition at the expense of our public systems of administration. And while I encourage criticism of administrative inefficiencies, there are more important matters of actual concern that are to be voiced.

Regards,

A citizen who knows better

Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]

10 COMMENTS

  1. At least let them know what they are signing up for don’t spring special Constable on them after the fact
    Y dupe the men n women
    Would you want any one treat you like that
    Some have families that depend on them
    N they all need work n a salary at the end of the month
    Unfair
    Would you like to be treated that way 🤔

  2. They were paid $1400 less taxes so 1300 plus you had to pay for living cost while at training camp which is about 400/450 plus purchase things they may need with 800 or so dollars a month. If you are coming with previous obiligations you can’t feed your family on 800 a month

  3. I am in agreement with this article as there are many private businesses that do the same, re: temp contract/stipend workers. My only concern here as raised by many, were these persons not privy to the fact that their appointment as special constables was with a time line attached? Were they indeed not aware. I would find that hard to believe. And if they were aware, then what is all this talk about? They agreed to it so let it play out in the manner in which it was intended.

    I do not advocate for the low salaries within our public sector; however, just like any other business operation, measures are taken to see to the business’ ability to strategically approach their overhead costs. Why should the government not be able to do the same?

  5. I am in totally support of this letter.
    Nothing is wrong in changes. Things evolves
    Previously, Police Officers take the oath. Then go on training. Problem was that once you are sworn in you are a full Police officer before day 1 of training. So for those who cannot make the grade letting them go is virtually impossible. So now, only those who passed the training should and will be sworn in as Police Officers.
    This is not best for the individuals, but it is definitely best for the country and the Force.
    Should they be paid full Police salary. That is debatable.
    My only issue, just as the writer opined, is if the recruits were not informed about these status.

  6. In Redemption Songs, Bob Marley asked that we “emancipated your self from mental slavery.” I would like to use some parody or contradictory here and ask ‘Commissioner’ Pompey to go on mental retirement. Find something to do. Drive bus or taxi, do farming or something. Hire a Spanish or anything to take up your time jack.
    To go on Observer and quote laws to allude, infer, or insinuate that persons knows not what they are doing with this special constables enlistment is wrong. And as the present Commissioner says, the time line was already set. They had it covered. He was very kind when he said quote “This is new to Mr. Pompey” Translation. Pompey don’t know what he is talking about about

  7. RON: …SHEER IDIOCY: …JACKASS MENTALITY: OR BLISSED IN IGNORANCE OR A ‘…JACK DONKEY’

    Firstly, ‘RON’s’ views shall be highly respected, and of course, likened to all others, contended.

    HOWEVER:

    The commenter run the risk of prompting ‘…RAWLSTON POMPEY’ to describe ‘RON,’ as a person of:

    (a) ‘…Expressing ‘…SHEER IDIOCY:

    (b) …Possessing a ‘…JACKASS MENTALITY: as

    (c) …To be seen as ‘…BLISSED IN IGNORANCE.’

    FACTS

    RAWLSTON POMPEY’S suggestion in correcting the apparent ‘…ADMINISTRATIVE BLUNDER,’ appeared to have been ‘…WELL RECEIVED,

    To the extent that on December 1, 2024’ several processes were followed:

    (i) ‘…The ‘…Special Constable’ status [Section 74: Police Act: Chapter 330] was
    changed:

    (ii) …The ‘…69 Men and Women were ‘…RECRUITED AND ENLISTED’ into the Police
    Service:

    (iii) …The ‘…69 Men and Women became ‘…FULL-FLEDGED POLICE OFFICERS,’
    having subscribed to the ‘OATH OF OFFICE’ [Section 17: Police Act: Chapter
    330].
    (iv) …They now have a ‘…LAW ENFORCEMENT CAREER,’ their then, and only
    ‘…ASPIRATION.’

    QUESTIONS:

    (i) …Has ‘…RON’ ever known that ‘…An Airline Pilot’ was ‘…TRAINED TO SAIL A
    YACHT?
    (ii) …Has ‘…RON’ ever known that ‘…FOOBALLERS’ to be CRICKETERS? and

    (iii) …Has ‘…RON’ ever known that ‘Medical Doctors’ were ‘TRAINED TO BE
    NURSES/WIVES?’

    NOW:

    Should ‘…RON’s’ answer be ‘…YES,’ then know that ‘…RON’ fits the description of a ‘…JACK DONKEY.’

  9. Why don’t these people who are willing to write these letters to “the editor” put their names to their letters so that we can know how simple minded they are?

Comments are closed.