– we must never allow it to raise its head again

THE fatal confrontation that occurred between the security forces and three men on the seawall on Thursday, March 15th, brought the discussion and debate on extra-judicial killings back into focus after a long hiatus.

This incident harked back to a time of trepidation that made extra-legal executions as common as the seawall breeze. This issue is always emotive, regardless of the circumstance. This column will seek to highlight the key mundane arguments that undergird this phenomenon in the Guyana context and will provide the writer’s take on this issue, which is already reflected in the title of this column.

The police would argue that this occurrence came on the heels of a spate of robberies perpetrated on unsuspecting bank customers. They would advance that law enforcement agents reserve the right to defend themselves while doing their very dangerous and often thankless jobs. They would also argue that ‘Ya damned if ya do, ya damned if ya don’t’. Indeed, it is not easy when the entire society lambastes the Guyana Police Force for not doing their jobs and when they do, they sometimes come in for wanton condemnation. They indeed come under undue pressure to produce results. Their position needs to be appreciated.

The general sentiment of some segments of the populace would be one of jubilation, when perceived ‘thief men’ are shot dead. Some would quip, ‘If they aint went deh, they woulda neva end up dead’. In most cases, the only ones who are often perturbed and stirred to passion are the family members of the victims. I must add, there is always a section of the population who view these occurrences with consistent suspicion. Generally, there are those who feel a sense of revenge and are always triumphant at these times, especially if they have been victims of robberies. Only they know how it feels when a gun is placed at your head to deny you of your hard-earned possessions. So when executions occur, they thunder from deep within their souls, ‘Is good fuh dem, they aint wan wuk, they gon dead’. Their position, fraught with passion, comes from a place of pain.

The family members and civil society members are often the lone voices in the wilderness calling for inquests and due process. Filled with a deep sense of care for their loved ones, family members often staunchly mount a defence of their blood relatives. Familial instincts always come to the fore and there is never any hesitation to fervently reject any acceptance of guilt. Progressives who are involved in activism, know the importance of keeping the police force in check in a post-Jermaine Wilkinson and post-Yohance Douglas Guyana. This is understandable.

All of the aforementioned are deserving of consideration and cannot be dismissed in the grand scheme of things. However, due process has to be the common denominator for all the positions mentioned. Regardless of the circumstances, every incident that results in death, must be subjected to judicial review. This is how you construct an orderly society. Nobody should be too concerned about judicial reviews, once they have acted on the side of the law. This is even more pressing and applicable in a nation with a sordid history of extra-judicial killings. Further, it does not induce much confidence when false statements are released about the victims.

To those who rejoice at every execution without an investigation, remember the saying of the old man with his stick in hand, ‘today fuh me, tomorrow fuh you’. Only he who feels it, knows it. The same citizen who jumps for joy when there are executions with no judicial review, will become a voice demanding justice and due process, when their family members are caught up in this situation. Let there be due process; even if the worst ‘bandit’ is killed in a shootout, we should never allow the monster of extra-judicial killings to raise its head again.