Do not be misled by foreign investigators

THE EDITOR: Open letter to Commissioner of Police Gary Griffith.

It appears that the UK firm Edmonds Marshall McMahon (EMM) is advising you to circumvent the input and advice of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) in order to obtain warrants to search the premises of an opposition politician before the general election.

Some 39 years ago the Privy Council, via Thomas v AG of TT32 WIR 375, warned us that the armed police force, with the potentiality for harassment that such a force possesses, would be converted into what in effect might function as a private army of the political party that is in government.

Lord Diplock stated that the TT Constitution insulates the police from political influence exercised directly upon them by the government of the day.

Thus it should be noted that the Office of the DPP is the principal public prosecution authority for TT and prosecution means all aspects of a criminal prosecution and includes pre-charge advice, the decision to prosecute, the decision of proceedings ancillary to a prosecution.

The functions of the DPP and the police and other investigators are separate and distinct. The DPP decides if a prosecution should be pursued and, if so, on what terms. The DPP acts independently of those responsible for the investigation while the DPP may consider the views of the investigator where appropriate. In the end it is the responsibility of the DPP to decide whether or not to proceed.

I respectfully wish to point out that you must recognise under the doctrine of the separation of powers that the DPP remains solely responsible for the taking of all prosecutorial decisions and the police remain solely responsible for the conduct of investigations.

EMM so far has received $50 million from the Government via the Office of the Commissioner of Police and in order to justify that fee and renewal of its private contract has usurped the function of the Office of the DPP and is now openly telling you not to seek the advice of the DPP in order to obtain search warrants and even warrants of arrest.

Lastly, reasonable grounds to suspect criminal behaviour is not prima facie evidence to issue warrants of arrest for the suspected commission of the criminal offence.

ISRAEL B RAJAH-KHAN SC

via e-mail