Wired868 Wired868 for smart sport news and opinion
“[…] Dr Paul Richards is not only an independent senator, but also a very experienced journalist. He ought to know better.
“He has an obligation to provide the evidence [against Senior Superintendent Roger Alexander from the TV6 Beyond the Tape programme], or publicly withdraw his statement and apologise…”
The following Letter to the Editor on allegations made by Independent Senator Dr Paul Richards against Senior Superintendent Roger Alexander (during a Parliamentary Joint Select Committee meeting) was submitted to Wired868 by Louis W Williams of St Augustine:
Photo: Office of the Parliament 2020
I am appalled that Senator Paul Richards based on media reports, at the time of writing, has chosen to take the position that he has nothing further to say on his allegation at a parliamentary committee meeting that Senior Superintendent Roger Alexander indicated on the TV6 Beyond the Tape programme that he (Alexander) was giving criminal gangs a bligh.
Alexander has taken umbrage to the allegation as he must—if, in fact, it is false. There could be no reasonable justification for a police officer of any rank taking the position that criminal gangs ought to be given a bligh.
Any such officer ought to be brought before a disciplinary tribunal and, if in fact he has given criminal gangs a bligh, obviously he should also face criminal charges.
In these circumstances, therefore, any such allegation against a police officer would cast a very serious aspersion on the character of that officer. In the absence of parliamentary privilege, if the allegation is untrue, I am confident it would result in a very successful lawsuit for slander.
Dr Paul Richards is not only an independent senator, but also a very experienced journalist. He ought to know better. He has an obligation to provide the evidence, or publicly withdraw his statement and apologise.
Silence is not an option, as it would cast aspersions on the character of Dr Richards, and his continued presence in the Senate as an independent senator. The general public, the representative association for police officers, and the rank and file of the police service must demand a response from Senator Richards.
Photo: Office of the Parliament 2023
It is my expectation that the Commissioner of Police (CoP) would also issue a statement on this matter to the local news media. Silence is also not an option for the CoP.
If Dr Richards’ statement is untrue and there is no defence of the officer by the COP, then such inaction will have a very negative impact on morale.
More generally, I am of the considered view that there must be a reconsideration of how the matter of parliamentary privilege is dealt with. Parliamentarians ought to be allowed to continue to receive immunity for statements they make in Parliament.
(Copyright Office of the Parliament)
However, if challenged by a member of the public about the veracity of such a statement, the relevant parliamentarian should be allowed, at a parliamentary sitting, to withdraw that statement and apologise—or stand by his statement and have the immunity withdrawn so that this matter can be addressed by the court.
“[…] The now-infamous Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), exposed thanks to Afra Raymond’s successful legal challenge, showed a lopsided agreement. The Read more
“The legitimate object of government is to do for a community of people whatever they need to have done, but Read more
“[…] The [Appeal] Court ruled that, despite modern thinking and growing public support for human rights, parts of our Constitution Read more
“[…] Both the Privy Council and the Court of Appeal noted that the motivations of the JLSC [in the Marcia Read more
“[...] Here in Trinidad and Tobago, the Road March results still rely on a manual system—TUCO officials physically count song Read more
“[…] In the news just recently, we had a case of a sitting MP evading a collection agency over a Read more
Want to share your thoughts with Wired868? Email us at editor@wired868.com.
Please keep your letter between 300 to 600 words and be sure to read it over first for typos and punctuation.
We don’t publish anonymously unless there is a good reason, such as an obvious threat of harassment or job loss.
