Articles - News

   It will be remembered as one of the most glaring incidents in recent times. News hit the airwaves on Thursday that four men were dead and one hospitalized as a result of a police shooting. As the day progressed, details on the incident began surfacing.

Around 2:30am on Thursday May 5, five men from La Clery, police reports say, attempted to burglarize the Beach Café in Vieux Fort, also known as Kitch’s Restaurant and Bar, opposite the Hewannorra International Airport. The STAR has been reliably informed the police received intelligence of the men’s activity and a task force was assigned to follow the men to their target in Vieux Fort.

Police have reported that the five men were attempting to rob this cafe near Sandy Beach.

The men entered the establishment and upon exiting, were intercepted by police. There was an exchange of gunfire. Two men were shot near the establishment while the others fled the scene aboard an awaiting vehicle. Police pursued and caught up to the men around the Sandy Beach area. In the end, the body count stood at four while one man is nursing a gunshot wound to his leg at the St Jude Hospital.

Dead are JnBaptiste Mc Farlane alias Epic, Mitchel Cadette alias Aparchie, Allan Lenny Louisy alias Alcapone and Myron Dupal. Kevin Ferdinand is said to be in a stable condition at the hospital.

The crime scene is cordoned off. This is reportedly the vehicle that police shot at.

Acting Commissioner of Police Vernon Francois and Acting Assistant Commissioner of Police in charge of Crime and Intelligence Frances Henry were on the scene. Francois said this serves as further warning to criminals that police will extend their efforts beyond the city’s boundaries to ensure there is justice.

“We want to issue a warning to people who think they can leave Castries and go down the coast with the intention of committing crimes. We will pursue them wherever they go to. We’d like to thank the member of the public for providing us with information which led to the response of the police in this incident.”

Francois asserts that because of the pressure criminals are facing in the city under Operation Restore Confidence, they are attempting to take their activities to the out districts. However, he assures the public the police will remain infallible in their duties and their commitment to public safety.

So far for this year St Lucia has recorded ten fatal police shootings and twenty six homicides, leaving the public wondering whether justice was really served. Especially in the cases of police shootings, there are lingering questions as to the nature of the force used and whether the police were justified in their actions.

In her Senate Budget presentation, Commerce Minister Tessa Mangal reaffirmed her support for the Royal St Lucia Police Force. However, she says to allay public concerns and fears, the Inquest process must be reviewed or else the public is going to believe cops are “judge, jury and executioner.”

Currently, there are only two magistrates acting as Coroners for Inquests—Velon John and Michelle Louis. John deals with Inquests in the north and Louis is responsible for all Inquests in the south. John is also the magistrate for the Family Court and Louis presides over the D Court. This highlights one of the magistracy’s shortcomings.

During an Inquest, witnesses present evidence and a jury decides whether a police officer is liable and should be indicted.

The Director of Public Prosecutions, Victoria Charles-Clarke, is the one to determine whether a matter should go through an Inquest. She does this after reviewing the file submitted by the police upon completion of their investigation.

   Have you stopped to think how difficult is the policeman’s job in Saint Lucia. I mean, where are the incentives to be the best an officer can be? In the first place, the pay is lousy, hardly enough to maintain the lifestyle of an ordinary young man. By which I mean, a young man with rent to pay, usually in the range of $800 or so a month. Then there are food bills, electricity bills and gas bills, whether for cooking purposes or for your car, if you have a car. So many policemen are also fathers who must find money to keep their kids in school, or who have girlfriends who expect to dress, well, in the fashion of a policeman’s woman. You know what I mean? How does a police officer keep the wolf from his rented door when all he makes is $3000 a month. And, for all I know, with no special insurance!
Let’s face it, being a police officer must leave you open to all kinds of temptations. When things at home are tight, when you can’t meet the bills I just mentioned, how do you say no to an offer that could pay the rent for a year and keep your girlfriend happy for at least three months? Of course, this scenario applies to police officers everywhere: the money they get offered under the table for just pretending to be deaf and blind for a few minutes can amount to ten times what they earn annually. That is some kind of temptation to resist.
Then there is the damned if you do, damned if you don’t syndrome that is so much life for police officers in Saint Lucia. Just a few months ago you couldn’t tune in to a talk-radio program without hearing the wall-to-wall experts. Not only were they telling the police how to do their work, where to look for clues and so on, they were also accusing the police of being in cahoots with the criminals. You heard stories about how untrustworthy were the police. Who will forget the time a well-known, high profile citizen called Newsspin for the specific purpose of issuing a warning to the civilian population. And what was that warning? He warned Saint Lucians not to tip the police off on criminal behavior because the police could not be trusted.
It didn’t help when a young woman accused unidentified police officers of either raping her themselves or aiding and abetting her rapists. People were calling for the dismissal of the officers, even without the smallest evidence to support their demands.
Crime became the main topic in the country. Young men were killing each other at the rate of two or three a week. And with no arrests, well, arrests that predictably went nowhere, the people again blamed the police, while the politicians blamed each other. And then, all of a sudden the tide turned. It seemed the acting police commissioner Vernon Francois had decided to grab the bulls by their horns, so to speak. Some well-known troublemakers were shot dead, allegedly after they opened fire on the cops during raids. If the acting police chief expected the gratitude of the populace, he soon had reason to think again. Now he and his men were being accused of all kinds of brutality, including extra-judicial killings. This morning’s news that a police contingent had shot five men in the course of a robbery, four fatally, seemed to confirm the worst suspicions. Someone actually asked Timothy Poleon on-air why it was that no police officer is ever shot dead during incidents like this morning’s? Almost as if the caller would happier to learn three or four cops had been dispatched by the would-be robbers. In any case, how quickly we forget. Wasn’t a police officer shot and killed near the waterfront several months ago? And what about the officer who was fatally shot at Ciceron?
It is true that even criminals are protected by the constitution. But while the police are supposed to protect the rest of us from the criminals, do we really expect them to make themselves easy targets for armed crooks. Shouldn’t we expect them to defend themselves? Which brings me to the matter of how much force the police are by law allowed to use. The answer is “no more than is necessary.” But you tell me: when in the course of say, a robbery, guns are pointed at the cops, what do we expect them to do? Presume the guns are not loaded? Run away and hide? I think not.
Instead of always jumping to conclusions whenever a suspected criminal catches a police bullet, why don’t we demand what the law also demands? Inquests. When was the last time a fatal shooting was followed by an inquiry? It is pointless calling up our favourite show every time there’s an incident like this morning’s to repeat the same useless lines that all of us have heard so many times before. Better for all concerned that the police be required to give full account following a fatal shooting. In the meantime, let us all remember the police are all we have to keep criminals from ruling our lives. We should not be making it more and more difficult for them to protect us!

   The Saint Lucia Labour Party continues to express grave concerns on the Post- Tomas Restoration works. The recent rains have exposed the wastage of public funds in the construction of the Anse Galet Culvert crossing and Minister Guy Joseph must be held accountable for this scandal.

The Ministry of Communications, Works, Transport & Public Utilities engaged FDL Consult as the Design Consultants. Mr Gilbert Fontenard is the major shareholder of FDL Consult. The contract was given by direct award, that is without being put out to tender, to Fresh Start Construction Ltd, whose major shareholder is Mr Peter Felicien. Mr. Felicien is also a shareholder in Hippolyte Equipment Services Ltd, a company in which Mr. Fontenard is a major shareholder.

The rains that fell on Friday April 29th 2011 caused the Anse Galet Culvert to overtop by over three feet of water causing the road to be impassable for over an hour. The Government has spent over $ 2.2 million for a structure that is worse than what existed before. The expert advice obtained by the Saint Lucia Labour Party suggests that the structure will have to be demolished and a new structure built to cater for the flows in the Anse Galet catchment.

Minister Guy Joseph must be held accountable for the wastage of $ 2.2 million and provide answer to the public on the following:

1. Why were the recommendations of the UN-ECLAC Report not implemented by his Ministry on the Anse Galet Culvert resulting in such massive wastage of public funds?

2. Why was a Direct Award contract for Anse Galet awarded to a firm that has no previous experience in such works?

3. Why should the lives of the people of the communities of Canaries and Soufriere be placed at risk at Anse Galet with every rainfall event?

   As I watched and listened to Prime Minister Stephenson King’s Budget rebuttal last week, and followed the Senate Budget debate this week; I felt a sense of tremendous sadness at what Saint Lucia had come to. There you had a Prime Minister who came to power clinging to the coattails of Sir John Compton, but has done nothing but disrespect the memory of the founding father of the UWP.

On his own merit and popularity, Stephenson King could never have become Prime Minister of St. Lucia or Political Leader of the UWP. Had it not been for the curious convergence of circumstances culminating in the death of Sir John in office, and with King as his last anointed Prime Ministerial caretaker; Stephenson King may well have been a house husband today. But fate would have it, that the UWP was in office, Sir John was on his last legs and King was the only one with ministerial experience and obedient enough to let hold the wheel.

When Sir John died, the Compton family together with Ausbert d’Auvergne and the traditional UWP financiers; manoeuvered Stephenson King into the Prime Ministerial chair; thus bypassing the next in line, Lenard Spider Montoute. Of course, King had to secure the support of his elected UWP Parliamentarians, and it is here, that some strange deals are said to have been made. Rufus Bousquet who had been fired a second time by Sir John Compton was apparently promised a return to the Cabinet. When that Cabinet re-appointment was seemingly ignored; Rufus Bousquet and Marcus Nicholas visited Government House to advise the Governor General that they no longer supported King as Prime Minister.

Richard Frederick also allegedly secured his pound of flesh and the Prime Minister tried to interfere in the constitutional authority of the Customs Comptroller. A letter was sent to the Comptroller asking him to settle administratively, the under-invoicing matter involving Richard Frederick. Mr. Frederick was allowed to sue his own Government while still a member of Cabinet and the Customs Comptroller was even illegally transferred for asserting his independence under the constitution.

King was virtually bulldozed into first firing his right hand man “Ausbert d’Auvergne and later his Attorney General Dr. Nicholas Frederick. D’Auvergne was seen as a Compton protégé who wielded too much power for the liking of Rufus Bousquet and Richard Frederick in particular. Dr. Nicholas Frederick was also seen as a Comptonite, and although his advice was constantly rejected by the Cabinet, with the help of people like Rick Wayne, they blamed him for the foul-ups which resulted from their ill-advised actions. Dr. Frederick was unceremoniously fired as Attorney General to bring in a virtual moron who cannot seem to get anything done right.

In November 2007, Sir John’s vacant seat in Parliament was filled by his daughter Jeanine, a qualified fisheries expert and well schooled in the political practice and philosophy of her father. The entire Cabinet had come down to Micoud North to campaign for Jeanine and expectations were high that with her grounding and training, she would have been offered at least the Fisheries portfolio in Cabinet. That was not to be because the real power brokers in Cabinet allegedly told Prime Minister King in clear terms, that they would not tolerate such a move.

So Jeanine Compton remained a Government back bencher and did her best, performing admirably and accounting dutifully to the Parliament and her constituents. But Stephenson King stood by and did nothing while the likes of Richard Frederick used ministerial power to abuse her. I listened to both Richard Frederick and Stephenson King making the legal point that it is the Minister who appoints village councils, but ignoring the crucial political point that the people of the constituency and their Parliamentary Representative must have a significant say in who is appointed to serve. Stephenson King, Rufus Bousquet, Spider Montoute, Marcus Nicholas Edmund Estephane are the ones who provide the nominees for their local government councils, so why must it be different with Jeanine Compton, Moses Jn. Baptiste, Alva Baptiste, Kenny Anthony and Harold Dalson?

Jeanine Compton reluctantly submitted a resignation to Prime Minister King in frustration. Instead of taking action to redress the situation and get Jeanine to remain with her party; King let Jeanine go and for who or what? A political opportunist named Gail Rigobert or isn’t it Zaide? Apparently, Dr. Rigobert or Zaide has been working with King’s National Development Ministry and wants political power instead of continuing to provide technical services. To get that power, it seems that Dr. Rigobert or Zaide has no problem in climbing like a crab over the daughter of Sir John Compton, and essentially spitting on the legacy which she, her leader and many more, claim to cherish. A few things about this woman worry me, from her lack of St. Lucian identity to her air of superiority. What’s with the American accent Gail, aren’t you proud of your St. Lucian speech rhythm? Why the clash of identities; you come in as Rigobert, then have an official circular going out changing your name to Zaide (not on account of a wedding); and now with political campaigning in the air, you seem to have gone back to Rigobert. Such name changes are symptomatic of a crisis of identity which urgently needs to be resolved.

However, the thing that disturbed me most about Dr. Gail Rigobert or Zaide, is the haste and circumstances under which she accepted her current Senate appointment. It was very déclassé and downright disgraceful to accept a nomination that effectively denied Gaspard Charlemagne a decent farewell for his services. Another committed Comptonite, Gaspard Charlemagne should not have been so unceremoniously dumped, and he should have been treated with much greater respect and appreciation. It was unconscionable to terminate Mr. Charlemagne so close to a debate for which I am sure he had prepared. There is very little value that Gail Rigobert or Zaide, King or the UWP can gain from this ill-advised Senate rush. The lady could have been appointed afterwards and this would have been more effective and appropriate.

The Labour Party is replacing its candidate in Micoud North, but that is no reason to replace Senator Silas Wilson. The same principle should apply to the UWP candidate in Micoud North especially given the fact that she claims Micoud roots and is running in what is considered a UWP stronghold. With Jeanine Compton set to contest as an Independent Candidate, the political complexion of the constituency may well be about to change, and rightly so.

The venom with which Prime Minister King attacked Jeanine Compton and even Sir John in his budget rebuttal, betrayed a deep-seated ingratitude and vindictiveness. Why is King and company virtually purging the Party of the Compton element which was necessary for them to win the last elections? All the respect and reverence for Sir John seem to have evaporated as no less than our Prime Minister, descended into what clearly sounded like a revenge attack for things done long in the past by Sir John and recently by Jeanine Compton. For the Prime Minister to attack Sir John’s decision of the late 1980’s to overrule him then a junior Minister; and to attack Jeanine over her “born in yellow blanket” statement sounded petty and arrogant to me.

As the 2011 General Elections get closer, the people of St. Lucia are looking carefully at what is being offered for leadership of our country and its constituencies. By their actions to date, Stephenson King and Gail Rigobert or Zaide, have demonstrated a selfishness, vindictiveness and opportunism which cannot be about service to community and country. The people have seen this type of behavior before and are ready to reject the selfishness and ingratitude. For the mistreatment of Ausbert d’Auvergne, Nicholas Frederick, Jeanine Compton and Gaspard Charlemagne; Stephenson King must be punished.

   Minister of Planning, Economic and Social Restructuring and Gender Affairs Mary King has been sacked in a controversy over the awarding of a government contract to a firm in which she and her husband are shareholders.

Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar yesterday advised President George Maxwell Richards to revoke King’s appointment. In addition to being removed from the Cabinet, she has also lost her position in the Senate.

“It is a sad day for us,” the Prime Minister told reporters after meeting with the President.

King’s dismissal follows Persad-Bissessar’s receipt of a report by Attorney General Anand Ramlogan who also said the matter should be referred to the Integrity Commission for further investigation.

The Trinidad Express newspaper published a story on Sunday, questioning whether King breached the law by failing to disclose her financial and family interest in a software engineering company, Ixanos Ltd, which won a near TT$100,000 (US$15,748) government website development contract from her ministry last November.

King is named as Corporate Secretary of both Ixanos Ltd. and its parent company Caelum Holdings Ltd. and also has joint controlling shareholding with husband Dr St Clair King in Caelum. It is alleged she did not disclose that interest, was present at the opening of the bids, and was involved in selecting the bid evaluation team which picked the company.

King denies conflict of interest

King, a former chairperson of the Trinidad and Tobago Transparency Institute which is the local chapter of Transparency International – a global civil society organisation fighting against corruption – and current chairperson of the Caribbean Chapter of Global Organisation of Parliamentarians Against Corruption, said in an interview with the Express newspaper that she had not been involved in the actual evaluation process and explained she did not declare her interest when the bids were open in October to avoid any bias for or against Ixanos.

King insisted that there was no conflict of interest.

However, Section 29 (1) of the Integrity in Public Life Act defines a conflict of interest as one where “a person in public life or any person exercising a public function were to make or participate in the making of a decision in the execution of his office, and at the time knows or ought reasonably to have known that in the making of the decision, there is an opportunity, either directly or indirectly, to further his private interests or that of a member of his family or any other person."

The Act requires such persons to disclose their interest and disqualify themselves from any decision-making process.

King had also claimed that Prime Minister Persad-Bissessar was aware of the entire process and was “very satisfied” with it.

However, the Prime Minister said King’s comments were “entirely and categorically erroneous”.

“The matter was brought to my attention recently after the process had been completed and I made it clear that, on the basis of the information provided to me, it was highly inappropriate,” she said.

Report finds minister acted improperly

At the time Persad-Bissessar said she was awaiting a report on the matter so she could be “better informed to make a decision which ensures that the integrity of the Government remains intact”.

The Prime Minister did receive the report from the Attorney General who concluded that the minister acted improperly in failing to disclose her interest and disqualify herself from the entire process.

“I have concluded that a prima facie case is made out on the facts and documents before me to warrant a referral of this matter to the Integrity Commission for further investigation,” he wrote in his report, dated yesterday.

Ramlogan said the problem was compounded by the fact that the Minister appointed her Personal Secretary to serve on the evaluation committee.

“The Minister ought to have disqualified herself from the entire process. She should not have made any appointment or recommendation in this regard…The allegations made by PS [Juliana] Boodram and DPS [Joseph] Howard regarding the active role of the Minister in the process leading to the award of this contract is cause for serious concern. It casts doubt on the impression given by the Minister’s statement that she adopted an “arm’s length” approach to this transaction and was nothing more than a mere bystander to it,” he added.

Meantime, King has told the Trinidad Guardian newspaper that she is surprised that she was sacked before the allegations against her had been investigated by the Integrity Commission.

“There is no role for an Attorney General to investigate, it is the Commission that does the investigation,” she told the newspaper.