What’s logic of Williams as acting COP?

THE EDITOR: Recently the Police Service Commission reappointed Stephen Williams to act as Commissioner of Police for what, I seem to recall, is the 13th continuous six-month period .

While it might be argued that, over this long period, there have been changes in the membership of the commission, this is however to no avail as the commission is a body corporate with status of continuity.

Thus, had the commission found Williams unsuitable to fill the position, even on an acting basis, it is vested with the power and authority to rescind his acting appointment and to appoint another officer in his place.

One can only assume, therefore, that the commission has found Williams to be a suitable person to fill the position.

Notwithstanding the mechanism which has been established by the Parliament for receiving recommendations for the appointment of a COP and a deputy COP, is it not ludicrous and illogical that this same commission has now found itself, as it were, “burying its head in the sand” and recommending to the Parliament a candidate other than Williams?

Does it not appear to the commission that its action is an act of injustice to Williams, even taking into account the fact that applications under the legally ordained system is open to the general public?

I have been observing closely activities in the Police Service under Williams’s leadership and it seems that, apart from the issue of murders — a matter the causes of which seem to lie within the bowels of the whole society — there appears to be some improvement in the performance of the service.

Here we are dealing with an institution in which loyalty to its leadership is of paramount importance.

The special select committee of Parliament which has been charged to consider and report on the recommendations of the PSC for appointing a commissioner and deputy is yet to submit its report. The public awaits the outcome of its deliberations.

ERROL OC CUPID, Tacarigua