Perhaps for the first time Prime Minister Stephenson King sounded prepared to deal with the growing crime problem in the country. He listed a number of initiatives to combat the now overwhelming crime problem. The highlight of his crime-fighting speech was the sacking of the police chief Ausbert Regis. There remain few tears for the ex-police chief except for some opposition voices who appear concerned about the process by which he was fired.
Apparently Regis received his transfer letter on Saturday 29th May, a day prior to the prime minister’s public announcement of his sacking. Regis was taken totally by surprise given that he was in constant communication with the government authorities during the week of his sacking. The circumstances surrounding the transfer can best be described as shoddy and disrespectful. Such a move should have involved discussions and explanations with the relevant organs of government and the police chief but from all indications that did not happen; Regis was dumped.
Notwithstanding the shoddy process, the government’s minimum response to the destructive escalating crime problem and the apparent ineffectiveness of the police in dealing with the situation was the removal of Ausbert Regis in order to restore any public confidence in the police. In the face of growing criminality on our streets the ex-police chief remained an absent and silent figure. He was never one to promote public confidence that his men were up to the task. In fact the public had grown fed up and had begun asking that he be relieved of his duties. The politicians heard the deafening cries and responded accordingly. Regis has only himself to blame for his public inaction; a lesson for his successor that there is need to engage the public regularly about the efforts and successes of the police in their fight against crime.
What his transfer has done as with all management-head changes is to allow for a new and more credible approach to tackling the demanding task at hand. Vernon Francois, the new man-in-charge of the police force has already announced changes. Francois has courageously acknowledged the presence of corrupt cops in his midst and appears ready to deal with the problem. The new chief needs our public support if he is to succeed. He must be prepared to stand up to the Internal Security Minister if there is any attempt to influence or interfere with the day-to-day operations of police work. Police operations are for the police to determine, not the minister nor for that matter, the prime minister. Too often ministers have entered the domain of police operations which inevitably undermine the role of the police chief in the execution of his work. Vernon Francois needs to carry out his job without fear or favour. It is the only way he can secure his position. The people require nothing less than positive results in the police force’s fight against crime.
There have been calls that the internal security minister, Guy Mayers should also get the sack. If he has managed to keep away from interfering in the day to day decisions of police operations then it would be unfair to sack him. Policy matters for which the minister is responsible have the backing of the cabinet of ministers, so changing Mayers would be unwarranted unless there is a need for a significant policy change. But there is an issue that needs examining: the minister is enthusiastically seeking the seat as the Member of Parliament for Castries East, a hot-bed of criminal activity at the next general election. Is it the case that the minister is not prepared to propose tough policy actions in the fight against crime in the Castries East area, knowing that his policy may well upset voting residents- especially if they are supporters of his candidacy? Is he too pre-occupied with winning the Castries East seat to the point of not giving adequate attention to his demanding ministerial responsibility? Is it also the case that he may not be free of compromising circumstances which are likely to impede his effectiveness as the Minister of Internal security? So serious is this issue of crime in our country that if the answer to any of the foregoing questions is yes, then Guy Mayers should not be the minister for internal security.
In any case the minister’s performance and his public pronouncements must be kept under scrutiny. Already he has made some crass comments suggest he lacks an appreciation of the gravity of the crime situation. For example some weeks ago he was promulgating his desire for an acceptable level of crime rather than promoting an environment of zero tolerance.
In last Sunday’s crime-fighting speech the prime minister announced a series of initiatives. These initiatives must not be mere words to appease a society gripped in the fear of crime. The PM too needs to follow-up with progress reports about what initiatives have been implemented and their effectiveness. It is only then the public will be convinced the government is serious about fighting crime. The opposition on the other hand must avoid the temptation of trying to score political points on this crime issue; there are no winners when a country is in the grip of crime with senseless loss of human life. The society is watching; politicians warned, as a group, you are quickly becoming an endangered species.