Police commissioner cannot discipline rape-accused SOCU chief – gov’t legal opinion

Last Updated on Friday, 23 October 2026, 22:01 by Writer

Guyana’s solicitor general Nigel Ovid Hawke says in a legal opinion that police commissioner Clifton Hicken does not enjoy the independent constitutional power to discipline the deputy police commissioner, Fizal Karimbaksh, who has been accused rape and threatening behaviour by a female member of the police force.

The opinion states that Article 212(3) confines the commissioner’s expressed powers of appointment, disciplinary control, and removal to officers below the rank of inspector.

By itself, the opinion also states that provision does not confer jurisdiction over deputy commissioner Karimbaksh.

“The constitutional allocation of authority must be respected. The fact that the Commissioner of Police occupies the highest operational position within the Guyana Police Force does not, without more, confer upon that office an unrestricted power to exercise disciplinary control over every officer, irrespective of rank or constitutional status,” states Mr Hawke’s opinion which was independently authenticated by Demerara Waves Online News.

He also referred to Article 211(1) of the Guyana constitution that mandates the president to consult with the opposition leader and chairman of the Police Service Commission before appointing the police commissioner and every deputy commissioner, Article 232 (9) of the constitution that provides that where no time is prescribed or allowed in a written law within which anything shall be done, such thing shall be done with all convenient time, and section 29 of the Interpretation and General Clauses Act that allows for the person appointing a board or commission to remove, suspend, dismiss, revoke appointment or grant leave of absence to a member of that body such as a corporation, tribunal, commission, committee and other similar body.

The Police Service Commission (PSC) is yet to be reconstituted.

Mr Hawke states the president’s appointment power raises a substantial question as to the extent of his consequential authority concerning the deputy commissioner’s appointment.

He also states in his opinion that the precise scope of that authority must, however, be determined in light of the constitution as a whole and any applicable legal restrictions.

According to that legal opinion, the police commissioner may act in respect of deputy commissioner Karimbaksh only where a valid constitutional or statutory basis authorises the action, including a lawful delegation where delegation is legally permissible.

In the absence of such authority, the solicitor general says the commissioner cannot assume jurisdiction merely by virtue of his office or the ordinary command structure of the Guyana Police Force.

Mr Hawke also states that before any decision is made concerning leave, suspension, disciplinary proceedings, or removal, the relevant authority should identify the precise legal power being exercised and ensure that all applicable constitutional procedures and safeguards are observed.

The solicitor general adds that the commissioner would be required to rescind his letter in respect of leave, and the president would be required to address the letter.