CoP again asked to clarify status of firearm permits older than 3 years

POLICE Commissioner Erla Harewood-Christopher is again being asked to clarify the status of thousands of firearm user’s licences (FUL) holders who had their permits for more than three years which are now purportedly deemed invalid.

The query was made by attorney Nyree Alfonso in a letter to Allanna Rivas, head of the police service’s legal unit, dated January 8.

“We require you to definitively state what the Commissioner of Police believes is the status of the thousands of FUL holders who have held their FULs for periods exceeding three years.

"What then will be the fate if we accept the Commissioner of Police’s determination of invalidity (which we specifically do not) of thousands of current FUL holders?” Alfonso asked.

Alfonso said that based on the explanation provided by Rivas on February 1, FUL holders now have to apply afresh for licences and not renew.

Alfonso represents firearm dealer Towfeek Ali and scores of other FUL holders, including herself.

She also had other questions for the commissioner on the FUL renewal process.

“Moreover, what is the position of the Commissioner of Police concerning the status of the thousands of FUL holders, both civilian and in the protective services, who have firearms and ammunition according to firearms licences in respect of which they would have paid ‘the appropriate fee’ as contemplated by Section 39 of the Firearms Act up to the year 2023?

“What is the position of the Commissioner of Police concerning the many armed and precepted security officers deployed across the length and breadth of Trinidad and Tobago who are providing security to various types of property/assets, including those belonging to the Government of Trinidad and Tobago?”

Alfonso and her clients intend to challenge the renewal process announced by the commissioner in notices earlier this year. At the start of the year, she announced that all FUL holders had to renew their permits, including those who were issued FULs before 2004, when the Firearms Act was amended.

On February 6, Rivas said Harewood-Christopher would not be retracting the notices.

The notices the commissioner issued advised of an amendment to the Finance Act to increase FUL renewal fees to $500, effective April 1.

The second notice, a reminder, also advised of a $500 fee and said it was separate from the annual renewal fee of $300 for each weapon. The notices warned of the risk of sanction, or revocation, of FULs if the requirements were not met by holders.

Firearm licence holders must also submit a certificate of competence issued by a registered firearm instructor, a medical certificate and a renewal application all before April 1.

However, Alfonso said her team has received scores of reports which relay that people have attempted to comply with the renewal requirements but were met by officers who “do not understand what the process entails, and consequently, cannot explain to now confused and anxious FUL holders what their next steps should be, given the Commissioner of Police’s recent pronouncements.”

This, she said, also applies to security firms and their precepted guards who are now faced with a pronouncement that their licences are invalid having been rendered so by failure to renew on a triennial basis.

“This begs the question, what happens to the firearms in the hands of FUL holders whose licences are now declared to be invalid?”

Alfonso also said FUL renewals are required in three-year cycles and an FUL holder pays a fee per gun annually.

Alfonso explained that the act only provided for fees per FUL and not per gun as has been the practice.