PSC faces legal challenge over CoP selection process

PRESIDENT of the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service Social and Welfare Association ASP Gideon Dickson has been permitted to challenge the Police Service Commission (PSC) over the selection process for the position of Commissioner of Police (CoP).

Justice Nadia Kangaloo granted Dickson leave to advance his lawsuit.

He has a similar matter pending after being bypassed for deputy commissioner (DCP) before the same judge.

Dickson is represented by Anand Ramlogan, SC, Jayanti Lutchmedial-Ramdial, Natasha Bisram, Robert Abdool-Mitchell and Jared Jagroo.

In his latest challenge, Dickson alleges he was unlawfully deemed ineligible for consideration for the role of CoP because the PSC found his master’s degree did not meet the relevance criteria. He is seeking several declarations and an order compelling the PSC to consider him eligible for promotion to CoP.

Dickson contends that he was unlawfully excluded from the selection process because he has an MBA, which, he said, was acceptable under an existing policy but was later deemed insufficient without explanation.

Dickson’s lawsuit contends that the commission rejected his application despite his MBA being listed as a relevant qualification.

He also claimed another candidate, a current DCP, had nearly identical qualifications and his thesis was deemed eligible.

Dickson also provided the qualifications of three former commissioners, which, he said, gave him the confidence he would be acceptable for consideration.

He applied for the post in April 2024 and at the time he enrolled for his MBA, there was no published policy to determine “relevancy” as provided for in the legal notices governing qualifications for the top-cop post.

The notices advise candidates must have a master’s degree from a recognised university in criminal justice, criminology, police service management or “any other relevant master's degree.”

Dickson received his MBA in 2021. He said he previously advocated for another DCP who held a master’s degree in communications and in 2022, after discussions, the PSC agreed with a recommendation to consider MBAs a relevant degree to satisfy the legal notices.

The PSC published a relevancy policy in March 2022 and Dickson’s lawsuit said MBAs from the University of Bedfordshire, where he obtained his, was approved.

“The claimant’s degree is, therefore, one of the master's degrees which the PSC had already determined as satisfying the relevancy criteria.”

His legal team also contends the theses of other applicants for the top cop post, whose MBAs the PCA deemed satisfactory, addressed topics similar to his.

“He is unable to understand how the defendant applied the relevancy criteria to other candidates and deemed that he satisfied it on the basis that his thesis addressed the core functions of the police service but rejected the applicant/claimant thesis which was more or less similar…”

His lawsuit provided a side-by-side analysis of his thesis topics and that of one of the current DCPs.

Dickson alleges unequal treatment under the law, saying the PSC applied different standards to similarly qualified candidates. This inconsistency, he argues, is a violation of his rights to equality and fairness.

He also said he was never informed of any changes to the relevancy policy or given an opportunity to address any concerns related to his qualifications, and accused the PSC of failing to follow principles of natural justice. He also contends he was deprived of a fair chance to participate in the selection process.

Dickson's legal team argues that the commission’s decision was not only procedurally unfair but also unconstitutional. They contend the PSC acted beyond its authority to fix minimum qualifications and violated Dickson’s rights.

“Neither the Constitution nor any other piece of legislation authorises the commission to fix or determine the minimum conditions/qualification.

“In the circumstances, the purported review of the claimant’s thesis by the commission to determine whether it meets the prescribed minimum requirements is unlawful and illegal.

“Having produced the list of degrees that the commission publicly announced met this criterion it was patently unfair, arbitrary, illegal and irrational for the PSC to then treat the claimant’s degree as though it was not an approved degree and conduct a relevancy assessment to determine whether satisfied the very academic/ qualification criteria.

“The defendant is not entitled to use the relevancy policy to ‘pick’ and ‘choose’ which applicants they wish to consider and appoint.”