.jpg)
A serving military rank is among the last category of professionals expected to be part of criminal gangs, whether alone or in consort with others. Such a belief is bolstered by the traditional view that a military force, as an institution of service, represents the highest form of discipline.
This is an uncontested fact, given that its primary reason for existence is about the defence of its sovereign territory.
This is indeed very serious business, and explains why its code of conduct is not only hierarchical, and of a command nature, but also rigid and uncompromising against those who infringe its ideals.
Deviants would be subjected to severe discipline in keeping with the rules, as is expected in the military in every State, of whatever political system, in whatever region.
What must be appreciated about any State’s military is that since its members are drawn from that particular society, its human resources are inherently its products, and will reflect its social dynamics.
Nevertheless, the serviceman, because of his military conditioning, is expected to be disciplined, and above falling prey to criminal activity.
Within recent years, it has become common to read in the press that members of the Guyana Defence Force are being accused of alleged crimes, ranging from armed robberies to murder, simple larceny, weapons theft and sexual assaults, among others.
These are the types of offences that are usually attributed to delinquent civilians, and the fact that members of the national army were accused, and placed before the courts for such, evoked a plethora of responses from the general public.
Chief among these was that of an institution that had always been held in high esteem for its known discipline and professionalism had descended into some degree of sub-cultural conduct, occasioned by some of its serving ranks.
Was it a case of slippage of discipline within the GDF? Had the wrong type of persons been recruited? Or is it simply a reflection of the social ills that were taking place within society?
What is known is that most of these very serious incidents coincided with the criminal terrorist attacks that began in 2002.
But the army’s high command that underwent significant changes from around the mid-2000s resulted in its command structure undertaking a comprehensive and significant institutional review.
This review would have dealt with key aspects of its mission, especially the discipline factor.
To the full credit of the current high command, offenders are dealt with condignly. Not only are offending personnel court-martialled for the particular offence, but, once found guilty, they are promptly discharged and handed over to the police for further action.
The recent case of the dismissed lieutenant, after a military tribunal process, supports the view that the army means business in maintaining its traditionally high standards.
This particular incident occasioned a swift response from the Chief-of-Staff, who, during a visit to the interior location where the officer, along with other soldiers were alleged to have committed an act of robbery on a miners’ camp, promised swift action.
He gave assurances that “The Guyana Defence Force reiterates that it will not waiver in its complete intolerance for indiscipline, and will continue to hold its members accountable for any diversion from its Standing Operation Procedures.”
Not even senior officers are overlooked in the Army’s efforts to deal with infractions of any kind.
A Major was recently arraigned and placed before the Magistrates’ Court to answer an allegation of rape.
There was also the embarrassing case of the Army officer who committed a criminal offence while on an overseas training course. He was promptly booted out from the Service on returning to Guyana.
Other strategies initiated to deal with misconduct by serving ranks include publication in the media of the photographs and names of those who abscond.
In order to eliminate, as far as possible, would-be criminal elements from enlisting among its ranks, a strict process of public vetting, via the print media, is in place.
At every passing out ceremony of trained recruits, discipline, service, and high moral ideals are emphasized as absolute requirements demanded of every serving member of the GDF.
These are indeed timely and necessary reminders for those who wish to give service in such a critically important organization as a national army.
Nothing short of these high ideals can be accepted from those who wish to become custodians of our national borders, and a part of nation building.
The Army’s high-command must be commended for their determined and patriotic commitment towards restoring the Guyana Defence Force to its traditionally high standards.
This is an uncontested fact, given that its primary reason for existence is about the defence of its sovereign territory.
This is indeed very serious business, and explains why its code of conduct is not only hierarchical, and of a command nature, but also rigid and uncompromising against those who infringe its ideals.
Deviants would be subjected to severe discipline in keeping with the rules, as is expected in the military in every State, of whatever political system, in whatever region.
What must be appreciated about any State’s military is that since its members are drawn from that particular society, its human resources are inherently its products, and will reflect its social dynamics.
Nevertheless, the serviceman, because of his military conditioning, is expected to be disciplined, and above falling prey to criminal activity.
Within recent years, it has become common to read in the press that members of the Guyana Defence Force are being accused of alleged crimes, ranging from armed robberies to murder, simple larceny, weapons theft and sexual assaults, among others.
These are the types of offences that are usually attributed to delinquent civilians, and the fact that members of the national army were accused, and placed before the courts for such, evoked a plethora of responses from the general public.
Chief among these was that of an institution that had always been held in high esteem for its known discipline and professionalism had descended into some degree of sub-cultural conduct, occasioned by some of its serving ranks.
Was it a case of slippage of discipline within the GDF? Had the wrong type of persons been recruited? Or is it simply a reflection of the social ills that were taking place within society?
What is known is that most of these very serious incidents coincided with the criminal terrorist attacks that began in 2002.
But the army’s high command that underwent significant changes from around the mid-2000s resulted in its command structure undertaking a comprehensive and significant institutional review.
This review would have dealt with key aspects of its mission, especially the discipline factor.
To the full credit of the current high command, offenders are dealt with condignly. Not only are offending personnel court-martialled for the particular offence, but, once found guilty, they are promptly discharged and handed over to the police for further action.
The recent case of the dismissed lieutenant, after a military tribunal process, supports the view that the army means business in maintaining its traditionally high standards.
This particular incident occasioned a swift response from the Chief-of-Staff, who, during a visit to the interior location where the officer, along with other soldiers were alleged to have committed an act of robbery on a miners’ camp, promised swift action.
He gave assurances that “The Guyana Defence Force reiterates that it will not waiver in its complete intolerance for indiscipline, and will continue to hold its members accountable for any diversion from its Standing Operation Procedures.”
Not even senior officers are overlooked in the Army’s efforts to deal with infractions of any kind.
A Major was recently arraigned and placed before the Magistrates’ Court to answer an allegation of rape.
There was also the embarrassing case of the Army officer who committed a criminal offence while on an overseas training course. He was promptly booted out from the Service on returning to Guyana.
Other strategies initiated to deal with misconduct by serving ranks include publication in the media of the photographs and names of those who abscond.
In order to eliminate, as far as possible, would-be criminal elements from enlisting among its ranks, a strict process of public vetting, via the print media, is in place.
At every passing out ceremony of trained recruits, discipline, service, and high moral ideals are emphasized as absolute requirements demanded of every serving member of the GDF.
These are indeed timely and necessary reminders for those who wish to give service in such a critically important organization as a national army.
Nothing short of these high ideals can be accepted from those who wish to become custodians of our national borders, and a part of nation building.
The Army’s high-command must be commended for their determined and patriotic commitment towards restoring the Guyana Defence Force to its traditionally high standards.
