HOW DICTATORSHIPS START

On Sunday my wife and 16 year old son while driving in Diego Martin near to Victoria Gardens were stopped in a police roadblock. Okay. no complaint there. After producing her (Trinidadian) driver's licence and insurance, the police officer asked her where she was from. Why? I suppose the officer heard her accent ... she is Venezuelan. Then he asked her how long she had been here in Trinidad? She replied truthfully ... 22 years. He appeared not to believe her.  But her driver's licence shows when it was first issued. So? Why would he ask her that? Then the policeman turned to my son and asked for his ID ... which my 16 year old son had on him. Then the officer asked my son what was his ethnicity. When my son replied 'Trinidadian' he was told roughly 'that's your nationality, not your ethnicity'. Would he have asked my son that if my son was another colour? Certainly, if I had been in the car the policeman would have been directed to a short jetty in the Gulf of Paria and told to take a long jump.


Now, I don't know about you, but I found these questions to be as offensive as they were disturbing and when my wife and son came home and reported the incident to me I was as upset as I ought to have been. It is probably better that I don't say what I thought were his reasons for asking those questions, but I was and am offended and annoyed.  Look, it is either we live under a system of law or we don't. We can't pretend that we are law abiding when the police so casually trample upon our constitutional rights and ask intrusive questions that have no place in a civilized and law abiding community.


Then last Friday a client came to see me because he said that he said that he had received a call from a police woman from the St. James police station concerning a domestic dispute between him and his live in girlfriend. But the woman police officer didn't leave her name and when I called the number on his cell phone from which the call had been received there was no answer! So? Was it a real call? If so, why didn't the officer identify herself and why was there no answer from the landline on which the original call had been made? Because I called the number and got no reply! Or is it that the police do not now answer their landline telephones?


I guess I'm already keyed up and annoyed because of the reports in the newspapers about the WASA police seizing farmers' water pumps. Let me explain: all the fresh water that comes out of the ground in this country belongs to WASA and you can't even drill a well on your property at home and extract it without a licence. So, if the farmers did take water from a stream without a licence to do so then they have committed an offence and can be fined for that offence.




BUT (and it is a big "but") the Constitution of our Republic gives all of us a right to private property. Put another way, no policeman can take away anything from you WITHOUT  a Court Order. Anybody who does so is committing an offence. Put another way, two, or even three wrongs do not make a right.


Well, you might say that is no big thing. But it is a big thing. This is how dictatorships start ... take control of little things and gradually work up to bigger things.


Then we had the Gulf View searches in La Romaine. To date the police have not produced the search warrants. Again, why is this a big thing? Because as long ago as 1215 when the Magna Carta was signed a man's home was regarded as his castle and the State cannot enter into a man's home without lawful authority. This means that unless the police are in hot pursuit of a criminal they cannot enter anybody's property without lawful authority ... a search warrant or a Court Order... and if they do not show the owner the warrant he is within his legal right to refuse entry. Further, the police officer showing the warrant must be identified in the warrant as well as any other police officers who are looking to enter and search the house.


Now, from the news reports it seems that five houses were searched. Question: how many search warrants were issued? Another question: why has it been so difficult to produce the warrants? Another question again: why did some police officers cover their faces?


Then we have the ongoing problem of a policeman in a police car turning on his siren to get out of traffic to the annoyance of everyone. Heck, every weekday morning at around 7:15am I see a police jeep speeding eastwards in Cocorite with its siren blaring. You mean to tell me that you really believe that every weekday morning at about that time there is a police emergency?  Really? Pull the other one ... it's got bells on it!


This is the way that dictatorships start. At first the authorities abuse their powers in small ways and when there is no 'push back' then they push a little more, and then a little more and so on until before you know it your rights have flown out the window. 


One of the favourite excuses for the sort of police actions that we have been seeing recently is this is being done because of the extraordinary crime wave that we are experiencing. But, hello! That is what states of emergency were designed for under the Constitution. The advantage of having a state of emergency is that everybody knows that constitutional rights are suspended AND they are always for a limited time AND appropriate questions can be asked in Parliament ... which, after all, is what is supposed to happen.


What is not supposed to happen is that the police can effectively operate as if they are a law unto themselves and not give any account for their actions. We DO have a right to know and we DO have a right to ask questions and we DO have a right to push back against unlawful searches and seizures. At least, that is what our laws still say. If these laws have been changed then nobody has told me!