Jada Loutoo
TWO performing assistant commissioners of police (ACP) have been popular to instruct the overview direction of performed by a consultancy firm for first-division officers within the police carrier.
On September 10, Justice Joan Charles granted coast away to performing ACPs Winston Maharaj and Subhash Ramkhelawan to pursue their instruct in opposition to the Police Commissioner and Odyssey ConsultInc Ltd (OCL).
The 2 senior officers are searching for declarations that the overview direction of for the immoral of ACP changed into unlawful. They have gotten namely complained just a few member of one in every of the four interview panels – a retired police officer – for his or her oral overview on September 3. Each and every officers previously worked with the retired officer, with whom they’d a “fractious” relationship.
They complained in regards to the retired officer’s inclusion on the panel sooner than they were assessed, and their lawsuit acknowledged it changed into irrational. They have gotten alleged apparent bias in the end of.
Maharaj has since sought disclosure of the marking sheets for his overview.
Ramkhelawan complained he changed into now not suggested of a normal briefing the consultancy firm held sooner than the oral overview where he can have raised his concerns.
Their lawsuit acknowledged the promotion direction of for the immoral of ACP changed into “drawing shut,” with simplest ten vacancies.
Each and every senior officers apprehension their allegedly compromised overview can have an impact on their placement on the repeat of advantage checklist and can be prejudiced.
Their lawsuit additional alleged a elementary breach of confidentiality, as the written overview ratings of nine other candidates were disclosed to 1 in every of them. Their lawsuit acknowledged OCL changed into required to rate the candidates, create the advantage checklist and publish it to the commissioner, and the “unauthorised disclosure” changed into unlawful.
Maharaj’s attorneys despatched a pre-action letter on September 6, but there changed into no response, and the lawsuit contends the officers may perchance well now not discontinuance awake for a proper response, although they’re now not positive whether or now not OCL has yet submitted the advantage checklist.
Their lawsuit seeks an repeat directing OCL to re-interview them sooner than a fresh panel and for two vacancies of ACP to be preserved by the commissioner pending the listening to and resolution of their recount. They’re additionally searching for disclosure of the interview receive sheets and other field topic old by the panel to fetch out their marks, as effectively as the composition of every panel.
Their attorneys have additionally requested OCL to raise its hand on producing a advantage checklist and the commissioner from going forward with the promotion unless September 17, when their injunction application shall be heard.
The officers are represented by attorneys Vashisht Seepersad and Leon Kalichara.
