–
An official report of a conversation between the Surinamese Attorney General (pg) Roy Baidjnath Panday and the presidential work group Inspection Corps of Police Suriname (KPS), it would have emerged that the pg no longer wants to cooperate with part of the leadership at the KPS. According to him, chief of police Roberto Prade in particular should soon take a step back, wrote the Surinamese newspaper De Ware Tijd this morning.
In addition, Baidjnath Panday is also not happy with the cooperation between him and the inspectors Raoul Hellings and Sergio Gentle, respectively chairman and treasurer of the Surinamese Police Association. In an extensive response to the website of the Surinamese police, Chief of Police Prade indicated the comments / advice of the pg to berate.
The force leadership responded as follows:
According to the article, the pg, in a conversation with the presidential working group -inspection KPS-, would have made proposals to replace the leadership of the Suriname Police Corps. This concerns in particular: “the police chief Prade; the inspectors Hellings and Gentle, the chief inspector Van Gobbel and the police commissioner Seedorf ”.
With regard to the insinuated bad or disturbed relationship between the police chief and the PG, it is stated that the police force leadership did not experience the relationship as such, referring to the regularity of consultation moments with the PG. It may be said that the police chief had the last consultation moment with the PG on 18 August 2020. The next meeting should have been on September 17, 2020. However, this consultation moment was repeatedly postponed by the PG itself. Due to the fact that the minister has overall leadership over the general prosecution policy, the law prescribes a triangular consultation, under the leadership of the minister. There has not yet been any talk of this consultation between the PG, the minister and the police force management.
Vision Chief of Police
With regard to the accusation of the PG that the police chief has his own vision, which differs from his predecessors, it can be said that each person has his own style.
The Chief of Police is an authority in itself and on that basis it is necessary that he has a vision as being primarily responsible for the organization and management of the Suriname Police Corps. The leadership of the police organization can be expected to have its own vision. For example, this chief of police also has a vision with which he takes care of the organization and management of the force. The Chief of Police or Corps Leadership, as well as the PG, are the aforementioned authorities, each with its own field of work. Society in general and the police organization in particular would not be served by a visionless police chief.
Cooperation
It is suggested that Chief of Police Prade would be the problem when it comes to cooperation with the PG. The police chief wants to make it clear that he has no problems with the PG. The Chief of Police has a clear vision with regard to the organization and management of the KPS. The difference in insights that may arise is part of the police force’s cooperation in a professional relationship.
Needless to say, the Suriname Police Corps is a constitutional organization headed by a police chief who is responsible for the organization and management. In contrast, the PG is the authority at the head of the judicial process.
Replacement of police officers
The police chief does not understand why the PG is proposing the replacement of the inspectors Hellings and Gentle, the Chief Inspector Van Gobbel and the Commissioner of Police Seedorf. The legal position of police officers is protected by constitution. Nowhere in the law is it regulated to replace a police officer other than when a position is dismissed. The appointment of the personnel has been reserved for the president and the minister. It must also be clear that the Chief of Police is responsible for the organization and management of the police organization, while the PG has an advisory role when it comes to the interpretation of judicial care.
It is regrettable that the personal preferences of the PG with regard to the police personnel do not only concern the police chief. There is a strong impression from the whole that Mr. Roy Baidjnath Panday has expressed his personal preferences with regard to the filling of the police personnel and thereby consciously / unconsciously causes damage to officials in particular and the police force as a whole.
The force management expresses the hope that, where appropriate, officers must always observe the general interest in the performance of their duties.
— –
