Back in 1998-99 there was considerable controversy surrounding the policy decision by the then Government to introduce a system of departmental joint select committees to oversee the work of government agencies and departments.At the heart of that controversy lay the issue of whether or not the Service Commissions should be subject to the scrutiny of Parliament.
As someone who supported such a policy move back then, I am pleased to note that the development of this process has taken us to the point where the representatives of the people can go behind the veil of independence that hangs over Service Commissions in order to call them to account. The example of the appearance of members of the Police Service Commission before one of these special joint select committees last Friday was a most enlightening experience.
Before the existence of these committees, there was no way in which the average citizen would have been able to find out what was in the minds of those persons who were appointed members of Service Commissions. The performance put on by the Police Service Commission last Friday left the public in no doubt as to the deep division between the world views of the chairman, Nizam Mohammed, and some other members of the Commission.
The reality is that the chairman was able to lay out for parliamentarians his agenda and he advanced his methodology as to how he was going to deal with what he saw as a problem of racial imbalance in the senior echelons of the Police Service.That methodology did not find favour with a majority of the Commissioners. In the circumstances, how will the agenda of the Chairman be advanced?
There have been calls for the chairman to resign following his remarks made before the select committee. The chairman has been reported in the press as saying that he has no intention of stepping down. The Prime Minister, Kamla Persad-Bissessar, and the Leader of the Opposition, Keith Rowley, share the same view on the nature of the chairman's remarks before the select committee. The decision on whether to remove or to leave Nizam Mohammed lies with the President alone as it is a matter for his discretion after consultation with the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition.Nizam Mohammed is not resigning and there are people who support that point of view on the ground that he spoke factually about a situation in the Police Service.
On the other hand, his advocacy of getting the assistance of the Parliament to help redress that imbalance and some mention of the exams for senior police officers has created fear in the minds of some. This is not healthy as a Service Commission chairman should not cause anyone to become fearful about the career prospects because of a racial imbalance.Imbalances are inevitable in this society and their existence does not imply anything sinister. The fact that the imbalance that Nizam Mohammed complained about may find its opposite in some other field of endeavour does not mean that there is something sinister about it. The Prime Minister has taken a firm and decisive position on this matter and so, too, has the Leader of the Opposition.
Indeed the more that the supporters of Nizam Mohammed continue to argue that he is right, the Prime Minister gets the opportunity to seize the centre ground to distance herself from them and does not leave the centre alone for the Leader of the Opposition. They have done her a huge political favour so that she can redefine herself for the national community post-Reshmi.It would be extremely difficult for Prime Minister Persad-Bissessar to lead a People's Partnership Government based on national unity that is pursuing a policy of multiculturalism and simultaneously embrace Nizam Mohammed's agenda.
Politically speaking, the longer the controversy continues she gets the opportunity to maintain a safe distance from that worldview that is based on affirmative action and quotas and, instead, she and her government can pursue a meritocracy which allows equal opportunity for all.The only political problem that lies over the horizon is whether President George Maxwell Richards will remove Nizam Mohammed from office or not. The decision rests entirely with him as it is one that he must exercise after consultation with both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition. He has already done that. At the time of writing, there are reports that the President has summoned Nizam Mohammed to meet him.
Dr Keith Rowley has argued that President Richards must remove Mohammed if he is to save the presidency. Kamla Persad-Bissessar has said that she will not reveal what she discussed with the President, but she has publicly condemned Mohammed's statements.If President Richards removes Mohammed from office, there will be an outcry from one sector of the People's Partnership supporters and nowhere else. If he does not remove him, the PNM will have a serious political problem on their hands in relation to the presidency, while Mohammed will remain in the minority inside the Commission.