By Travis Chase | HGP Nightly News |
GEORGETOWN, GUYANA — Former Chairman of the Police Service Commission and retired Assistant Commissioner of Police Paul Slowe, DSM, has launched a blistering critique of the Guyana Police Force’s (GPF) operational conduct in its investigation surrounding Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed, his videographer, and his driver near President Dr. Mohamed Irfaan Ali’s private residence in Leonora, West Coast Demerara.
Analyzing the sequence of events and official police statements, Slowe pointed to glaring contradictions and shifting narratives, challenging investigators to demonstrate what specific criminal offense was committed when ranks intercepted the vehicle.
Shifting Narratives and the Evidentiary Vacuum
Slowe closely examined the disparity between the Force’s initial press release and its subsequent narrative after public scrutiny intensified:
- The Initial Vague Account: The GPF’s primary statement claimed that ranks observed two heavily tinted vehicles acting “suspiciously” in the Leonora area. Slowe pointed out that the first bulletin contained zero mention of ranks witnessing a drone in active flight.
- The Evolving Allegation: A secondary bulletin later alleged that police acted on intelligence indicating persons in a black Toyota Land Cruiser were flying a drone over the Head of State’s private residence. Slowe questioned why this central justification was omitted from the initial official dispatch.
- Mere Possession vs. Unlawful Operation: While investigators reported recovering a silver-and-black DJI drone from the trunk of the Land Cruiser, Slowe argued that possessing a drone inside a vehicle is fundamentally different from operating an unmanned aerial vehicle in restricted airspace.
“Is it unlawful or illegal for vehicles to drive around or people to walk around the President’s residence? Tell me what law they’re breaking,” Slowe questioned. “At first, all they told us is that this vehicle, or these two vehicles, were acting suspiciously… Now they’re telling us persons travelling in the black Toyota Land Cruiser were allegedly operating a drone over the area.”
“All you have to do is check the memory card to see if there were images of the President’s private residence, and that would have established very quickly whether the drone was being operated or not,” he added.
Unlawful Arrests and Late-Night Residential Searches
Slowe took aim at the procedural legality of detaining the Opposition Leader, videographer Dwayne Ross, and their driver, asserting that law enforcement ranks conflated subjective suspicion with the statutory thresholds required to deprive citizens of liberty:
- Arrest Without a Distinct Offence: Slowe reiterated that under common law and the Police Act, an arrest must be tied to a distinct, cognizable offense communicated to the citizen at the time of detention.
- Questionable Search Warrants: He raised serious questions regarding late-night searches executed at the private residences of persons connected to the probe, questioning whether search warrants were lawfully issued by a magistrate and whether they explicitly endorsed nighttime execution under statutory exceptions.
- Escalation via Unprofessionalism: Slowe concluded that the entire controversy escalated due to poor police handling and procedural irregularities rather than genuine national security threats.
“You have to tell them what you are arresting them for,” Slowe stressed. “Reasonable suspicion is not an offence.”
Slowe’s remarks follow the recent appearance of videographer Dwayne Ross in the Georgetown Magistrates’ Court, where he was granted $600,000 bail on three drone-related charges while attorney Eusi Anderson launched a challenge to their statutory foundation.
