Former Police Commissioner, Gary Griffith is a happy camper today, after a judge ruled in his favour and blocked the Prime Minister and the National Security Council (NSC) from laying the controversial firearm user’s licence (FUL) audit report in Parliament.
High Court Judge Devindra Rampersad ruled on Wednesday that the Council led by Dr Keith Rowley was allowed to request the investigation that was done by a team of retired police officers.
He stated that the report could not be made public by laying it in Parliament.
He also ruled that the report could be considered by the Cabinet as it may assist in guiding possible changes to firearm ownership in T&T.
Griffith, in a statement, said: “We are happy that the court has agreed with my main complaint that led me to take this court action against the PM and the entire National Security Council.”
He said the PM was totally out of line to try to publish the audit report in parliament without first giving him a right to be heard on the contents of the report.
“The court ruled that not only was Rowley blocked, he was supposed to take any information to the relevant bodies, which are the TTPS and the Police Service Commission; which is what I contended from the beginning, and my court submissions attest to that,” said Griffith.
He noted, “Indeed the court ruled that the PM acted irrationally in trying to publish the report without first hearing what I had to say, and they didn’t give me an opportunity to clarify any misinformation in the report.”
“The court further granted an injunction in my favour preventing him from publishing the report and went on to say that “the court became alarmed that the Executive exerted power to send persons in – a team of ex-police officers at that, who are no longer subject to the Police Service rules and regulations – to investigate police records.”
Griffith said the court went further saying “Those records are obviously related to the operation of the Police Service and ought not, in this courts respectful view, to fall into the hands of the Executive or any other person acting on behalf of the Executive by means of the Committee even though it was done through the unchallenged allegation of the permission of the Commissioner of Police at the time.”
Chastising the Prime Minister and his team and also describing their actions as irrational, whilst upholding the induction and blocking the Prime Minister, could never be seen as a victory, which makes the statement from the Attorney General’s Office a work of fantasy at best, or at worse, a blatant attempt to peddle misinformation to the public.
COMMENTS