Dear Editor,
I have read Mr GHK Lall’s articles in various media, and have perused them with great interest, based on his often-insightful opinions.
I’ve enjoyed these missives because, for the most part, his analyses and conclusions have been objective. However, I do believe that his most recent opinion piece (Monday, October 7), appearing on an online news outlet, warrants a critical response.
Captioned ‘Commissioner Hicken – time for congratulations or condolences’, the article implies that when Mr. Hicken is appointed Commissioner, he will be scrutinized more than any of his predecessors. The question anyone should ask is: “Why should this be so?”
First and foremost, it is apropos for me to point out that innumerable shocking incidents have occurred under Hicken’s predecessors; many have been embarrassing and scandalous issues, but I have never seen any opinion expressed by GHK Lall that any of them “could go down in the history of the Guyana Police Force as…lesser than the most disappointing Top Cop that this country ever had”.
When Mr. Hicken was spitefully overlooked by the previous administration – including officers junior to him being promoted ahead of him – there was no writing on his behalf. When persons placed above him were abject failures, why weren’t there any condolences then for law-abiding citizens of this Republic?
Mr. Lall is not the only writer who has zeroed in on the current Top Cop. Yes, all eyes seem to be trained in his direction, and the relentless examination is disquieting. It is a crude, transparent attempt at death by a thousand cuts.
Editor, Mr Hicken has been operating in an environment wherein evolution is taking place in society generally; where youths are perpetrating crimes on the law-abiding, and even against each other; and where technology and social media are quite often misused and abused. Considering that he has been acting as the Commissioner, one must admit that he has competently navigated all these circumstances, and has done a relatively good job. His leadership has been vibrant.
Police commissioners must be judged by the public, but members of the public also has a responsibility to conduct themselves lawfully and respectfully, understanding that policemen and women who protect and serve us are all Guyanese like us, and the same communities that they are trying to fix are the same communities from which these policemen and women derive.
And so, the least the public can do is work with the Police Force to help it meet its frequently publicized goals.
Mr. Hicken has always been community-oriented and youth-focused in his pursuits.
Objectivity allows for clear thought in writing. Mr. Lall and others are reminded that the messages Mr. Hicken has been conveying to his officers and other subordinates have never been unorthodox. He has, to the best of my knowledge, promoted the path of best practices for the organisation. He has repeatedly pledged to make the Guyana Police Force the best in the Caribbean, and has demonstrated this ambitious desire in his presentations when representing the Force at engagements overseas. In my humble opinion, he sells Guyana in the way it ought to be sold.
In fact, we have read that most of the forces in the Caribbean are trying to adopt the principles, policies and methodologies used in the Guyana Police Force in an effort to reduce their crime rates.
Having said all this, I am particularly disgusted that the businesspeople in Guyana are not highlighting the fact that they are operating in much improved circumstances in terms of crime threats. The silence is deafening. The private sector in particular thrives in a country with the low crime numbers that we have. Normalcy has prevailed for some time. When foreign investors come here, there is no longer the inherent fear of violent crimes being committed against them. Yet, there has not been so much as a peep from those who are benefitting.
The private sector is enjoying all the sweet, but curiously steering clear of being identified as being supportive of Mr Hicken and the advancements that have been made in relation to overall safety during his tenure so far. It is quite frankly a betrayal of trust.
If there is honesty in their midst, and within the hearts and minds of all law-abiding citizens who would have interacted personally with Mr. Hicken, I am certain that their contributions in favour of him, via whatever media is available to them, could and would provide better perspectives for his detractors to pontificate.
