Judge: Police commissioners cannot be 'thin-skinned'

A High Court judge says a commissioner of police (CoP) cannot be thin-skinned.

Justice Carol Gobin made this comment in a judgement on a case between former CoP Gary Griffith and blogger Rhoda Bharath on July 11.

The case involved a defamation claim Griffith made against Bharath for two posts she made on her Facebook page on February 3 and 4, 2021, related to the death of Andrew Morris at hospital on February 1, 2021.

Morris was one of the suspects in the kidnap and murder of Andrea Bharatt.

A clerk at the Arima Magistrates Court, Bharatt was last seen alive on January 29, 2021. Her body was found at the Heights of Aripo on February 4, 2021.

In her judgment, Gobin dismissed Griffith's claim against Bharath and ordered him to pay Bharath's costs.

On examining the evidence, Gobin did not agree that Bharath's criticisms of Griffith as CoP were "aimed at him personally nor were they intended to hurt him personally."

Referring to Section 123 of the Constitution, Gobin said this section requires a CoP to ensure the human resources of the police are used efficiently.

"The power comes with or some might say, is outweighed by, the tremendous responsibility imposed on the head for the general day-to-day safety of the population, for crime fighting and for regulating the activities and operations of all officers in the TTPS (TT Police Service)."

The judge also said, "A commissioner must expect to be the target of criticism not only on spiralling and uncontrollable crime and low detection rates, but on complaints of police brutality and police killings. The buck stops with him or her. A commissioner cannot be thin-skinned. This is a democracy. People are entitled to criticise office-holders, harshly."

Gobin cited legal precedents which showed none of the publications made by Bharath could be considered defamatory of Griffith.

One was the 1990 Privy Council judgement on the case of Hector vs Attorney General of Antigua and Barbuda and specific remarks made by Lord Bridge of Harwich in that judgement.

He wrote, "In a free democratic society it is almost too obvious to need stating that those who hold public office in government and who are responsible for public administration must always be open to criticism. Any attempt to stifle or fetter such criticism amount to political censorship of the most insidious and objectionable kind."

Gobin observed that a focus of Bharath's posts was the criticism of the police procedure adopted in relation to Morris's death.

The judgment included a copy of a police statement issued on February 3, 2021, outlining a sequence of events starting from Morris's arrest on February 1, 2021 and his death at the Arima Hospital later that day.

Some of those events included Morris allegedly acting violently and falling to the ground when he was arrested, refusing to see a doctor when offered the opportunity while in police custody, falling on two occasions at hospital and subsequently dying in the emergency room.

The statement claimed police were told Morris was hypertensive and diabetic.

The judgment also referred to a post-mortem report by Prof Hubert Daisley on Morris's cause of death. Morris's family commissioned Daisley to do the post-mortem.

His report said Morris died from "severe blunt force trauma to his chest, abdomen, limbs and skull."

The judgment also mentions that another suspect in Bharath's disappearance, Joel Balcon, died in police custody on February 8, 2021.

Gobin said, "While the stinging and impassioned criticisms of any unit of the TTPS ultimately reflects on the leadership of the TTPS and the CoP, such criticism, however sharp, cannot amount to defamation of the individual who holds the office.

"The words could not in any sense be understood to ascribe responsibility for the fate of Morris to the claimant (Griffith) other than in his capacity as head of the police service. At no time did the defendant (Bharath) impute guilt to the claimant personally, nor could it reasonably have been understood as such."

Comparing the content of Bharath's posts to findings in the 2020 Privy Council case of Ramadhar vs Ramadhar, the judge said, "The statements could also be taken at their highest as a justifiable cry for an investigation."

Gobin added that in the context of the circumstances surrounding Morris's death, "no amount of loose thinking could cause listeners to conclude that the claimant (Griffith) was personally involved or that he actively directed and encouraged the killing of Mr Morris."

She said Bharath's call for accountability on this matter was not only directed to Griffith in his role as CoP.

It was also directed to Police Complaints Authority director David West, the police Professional Standards Bureau and the chairman of the Police Service Commission.

Gobin said she found Bharath's posts "to constitute fair comment on what is agreed were matters of public interest."

She added that Bharath met the requirements outlined in the 2010 Privy Council judgment of Spiller vs Jacob: the comments were on a matter of public interest, were based on facts which are true or protected by privilege and were recognised as comments as distinct from an imputation of fact.

Gobin said having seen Bharath and assessed her credibility as a witness, she did not believe her criticisms of Griffith as CoP were personally aimed at him or intended to hurt him personally.