Still no promotion to ASP rank as more cops complain

AN injunction to stop Commissioner of Police Erla Harewood-Christopher permitting the promotion assessment process for the rank of assistant superintendent of police (ASP) will continue.

The temporary injunction Justice Frank Seepersad granted on October 2 to Insp Mark Hernandez, the former head of the police service’s now-defunct Special Operations Response Team (SORT), was extended at a hearing on October 7.

It continues until October 30 or until the court further orders.

Hernandez, who is on suspension pending criminal charges against him, is challenging the promotion process for ASPs, as he contends the procedure being used is contrary to the Police Service Act and Police Service Regulations.

He was permitted to advance his case for declarations that the consultancy recruitment firm used by the commissioner to assess officers appointed people without the appropriate skill, expertise and qualification in policing to the assessment panels, and that the commissioner's irrationally allowing a settled practice to award officers a “universal outstanding grade” was also illegal.

Another officer – Insp Veneta Weaver-Ali – has filed a similar complaint and was permitted to pursue it at the October 7 hearing. A third was expected to file a similar action.

At the hearing, state attorney Coreen Findley sought to have the injunction discharged in the balance of justice and the public’s interest, since the matter affected several officers. She also asked for additional time to put in evidence for the top cop and the Attorney General.

However, Seepersad said he was not minded to discharge the injunction, since the evidence so far raised issues that could point to a fundamental breach of the legislation and regulations.

‘The public’s interests cannot be served if there is a flouting of the legislative requirements that govern the process…

“I am strong in my view that scenario can never be one in the public interest if there is a breach of parliamentary guidelines on how this process should take place. I am not inclined to discharge it until I get an affidavit justifying the process.

“And in fact, it protects the public interest from any arbitrary interference with the statutory mandate as outlined by the Parliament as it relates to the promotion process.”

Hernandez is seeking an order to have the commissioner disclose the qualifications of each member of each panel appointed by Odyssey ConsultInc Ltd; and interviewees' score sheets from each assessor.

He also wants the court to quash the current promotion exercise for ASPs and to compel the commissioner to start over the process under the directives of the Police Service Act and the Police Service Regulations.

Central to Hernandez’s claim is that the three-part process for assessing officers for promotion to the rank of ASP is set out in a written policy and the police service regulations, but these are not being followed.

He said the first component entailed an appraisal system similar to a staff report in the public service, but because of the “systemic failure to implement the policy, everyone gets the same mark.”

He contended inspectors' superiors gave them a universal score of “outstanding.”

However, he contends the award of this “universal mark of outstanding” was contrary to police policy and to the statutory aim of achieving a merit-based system of promotion.

“Nothing is done pursuant to the policy. What happens is the supervising officer gives a mark of outstanding…Because of the systemic failure to implement the policy, everyone gets the same mark.”

Hernandez received an “outstanding” mark before he was charged in 2021, and in July, Odyssey ConsultInc invited him to a briefing session for assessment for the rank of ASP.

He has also challenged the second aspect of the promotion process, which is a written exam. Officers who score below the 50 per cent pass mark are not allowed to advance to the final step, an oral assessment/interview.

Hernandez said he received information that some officers did not achieve the 50 per cent pass mark, but were nevetheless permitted to advance to the final stage.

He is also challenging the composition of the panel of interviewers in the final stage, saying the panels put together by Odyssey are not in keeping with police service regulations.

In his affidavit in support of his lawsuit, Hernandez contends the process potentially discriminated against tactical police officers.

“I have given my entire professional life to the service of the TTPS. It has always been my professional goal to protect and serve the people of this country and I have consistently attempted to achieve that intention in my professional and public life.

“I do not wish to be the subject of a system that is procedurally unfair in judging and assessing my promotional prospects neither do I wish my colleagues to be subjected to such a process.

“Promotion to any rank in the first division of the TTPS must be conducted fairly and transparently and lawfully.”

Weaver-Ali’s complaints are the same, but she said her “outstanding” grade was not given by her superior officer and other aspects of the promotion process were compromised mainly by a gender bias in the composition of the panels; a difference of qualifications of those on the panels; and a lack of uniformity in the questions asked.

Hernandez’s attorney Gerald Ramdeen told Seepersad they had additional evidence of score sheets which showed officers who failed the written assessment went on to the third round, as well as documents to show more than 50 officers had not had their performance appraisals done at the first stage, but participated in the promotion exercise.

He said the entire process would have to be quashed.

In her application, Weaver-Ali said she “cannot stand by and see the organisation to which I belong crumble due to maladministration and lack of good governance. The upholder of the law cannot be found guilty of breaking the law, that undermines the rule of law itself and the public’s confidence in the TTPS.”

She said since she investigates white-collar crime, she has a “particular regard for detail,” so it caused her “great trepidation and unease,” because the present promotion process “reflects a total disregard for the process that has been enacted by Parliament.

“As an officer in the First Division of the TTPS, I have been clamouring for the promotion process to accord with the law and the regulations.

“It is clear to me that the process that has been engaged by the first-named intended respondent does not accord with the law. This has the potential to undermine the entire police service.

“The consequences of this to our country can be catastrophic and disastrous. I will do all in my power to prevent this from happening.”

There is currently a series of lawsuits by officers of various ranks in the police service complaining of different aspects of the promotion process.

In the most recent, two acting ACPs and a senior superintendent are challenging the assessment process for first-division officers as it relates to the composition of panels for oral assessments.

They have been permitted to pursue their challenge against the CoP and Odyssey ConsultInc Ltd (OCL).

Hernandez is also represented by Jagdeo Singh, Dayadai Harripaul and Nerissa Bala. Weaver-Ali is also represented by Singh, Karina Singh, Vashisht Seepersad, Savitri Samaroo and Keston Lewis.