IGNORANCE IS BLISS SEEPERSAD

By KEN ALI 

Trinidad and Tobago never heard of Bliss Seepersad before the police commissioner debacle, and hopefully would not hear of her afterward.  

With independent institutions falling apart faster than Chris Gayle’s batting form, little-known Seepersad is presiding over the decimation of an agency pertinent to citizens’ security. 

That one acting police commissioner is leading the troops and another is living in the barracks is the result of gross mismanagement of Police Service Commission, led by Ms. Seepersad. 

That crime-ridden T&T remains without a substantive commissioner is the direct fault of the PSC, which began the essential process at its own slow, sweet time. 

That incumbent Gary Griffith was suspended by the PSC after the inexcusable involvement by a politician not only pollutes the procedure but also undermines the roles and responsibilities of service commissions. 

Ms. Seepersad and her colleagues may not care to know this, but framers of the 1962 independence constitution introduced such commissions to protect public officers from political overreach. 

As far back as September 20, 1957, Dr. Eric Williams told the then-Legislative Council told the Public Service Commission “must be an independent body.” 

At the 1962 constitution talks at London’s Marlborough House, Dr. Rudranath Capildeo advocated independence of the commissions mandated to employ, promote and discipline employees in the public sector. 

Ellis Clarke, then a constitutional advisor to Cabinet, backed the independent system, having being influenced by their workings in several countries. 

Such officers – teachers, judicial and legal service employees, public workers, and law enforcement personnel – must be detached from political involvement, Dr. Williams said on a roadshow to promote the 1962 constitution. 

As recently as last November, Independent Senator Anthony Vieira presented a motion noting that service commissions were established “to insulate persons holding or acting in public office from political influence, patronage, and discrimination.” 

Yet, the Police Service Commission was evidently asleep at the wheel amid the spectacle of a Government-prompted probe into an alleged gun-for-sale racket under Griffith’s watch. 

The gambit turned even more intriguing when the lead investigator Stanley John, a retired jurist, no less, assured Griffith that “my remit does not involve an investigation into your goodself as COP…”   

Still, the Seepersad-led commission suspended Griffith, leading to fertile speculation about political manipulation of the independent body. 

This was preceded by an engineered media “investigation” which unveiled a slew of alleged malfeasance under Griffith’s watch. 

That the media has not shown a similar appetite for the WGTL-type National Gas Company billion-dollar waste of taxpayers’ money is a relevant side issue. 

In all of this, Griffith must face his just deserts. 

Whether he is victim of a witch-hunt or is guilty as suggested, there must be natural justice, which for a commissioner of police must come from the established institution – Seepersad’s PSC. 

At the same time, Griffith must level with the nation on whether he was pressured during his term to lay political charges. 

If so, could the next handpicked police chief be malleable to political intrusion? 

As for the PSC, any subversion of its autonomy is especially disturbing because of the growing national drumbeat of a breakdown of vital independent agencies. 

A recent survey found that confidence in the judiciary – arguably the most important national institution – was barely over single digits. 

The commissioner chaos has provided a dark insight into our shaky institutions, apathetic country, and compliant stakeholders. 

It’s not too late for Ms. Seepersad to chuck the job, tell her story and worm her way back into the woodworks