Unfinished Caricom business

It has become absurdly fashionable in some circles to dismiss Caricom as a wasteful, irrelevant enterprise worthy of dissolution and relegation to the garbage bin of history.

Over the years, I have realised that even greater than the malice generated by false notions of socio-cultural, geographic and other forms of inherent individual strength and weakness is the pervasive ignorance surrounding the nature of the institution our community of nations has built, and the misplaced expectations that accompany it.

The process of “leaving” Caricom is more than getting up in disgust in the middle of an unsatisfactory stage performance. For, while doing so, attachments to various appurtenances of the theatre, including the main stage and other pieces of infrastructure, including the ceiling, do not remain undisturbed.

Over the past 53 years of Caricom, its mandates and institutional responses have grown to extensive and diverse degrees. There are now, for instance, almost 30 specialised and complementary autonomous and semi-autonomous institutions that serve as key pillars of the integration process.

I have offered the reminder numerous times that, among these institutions, is the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), headquartered in Port of Spain.

It serves as the legal forum through which 12 member states, including T&T, may resolve disputes arising from the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas. This is the mechanism now being invoked at T&T’s insistence in relation to the appointment of the Caricom Secretary-General.

Attorney General John Jeremie is familiar with CCJ processes, having appeared as attorney for Trinidad Cement Ltd in the 2022 case against the government of T&T. He also appeared, together with Keith Scotland and others, as counsel in a matter - [2022] CCJ 15 (AJ) GY - involving the appellate jurisdiction of the court at the height of the 2020 post-election debacle in Guyana.

Though the court currently serves as the court of final appeal for five member states: Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Guyana, and Saint Lucia, our country has, in this regard, been very much “in the CCJ”, albeit through other means.

The recent July 7 appellate judgment of the CCJ, to cite another example – [2026] CCJ 8 (AJ) BZ – features the prominent involvement of former Attorney General Anand Ramlogan in an election boundaries case related to Belize.

There are professionals far more qualified than I to challenge the nonsense surrounding T&T's alleged non-engagement with the court – “we not in the CCJ” - and I remain surprised that the Law Association has never undertaken a rigorous public awareness campaign to address this endemic ignorance, even at senior levels.

Among things to also be considered in the “get up and leave” sentiment is the fact that Caricom “entanglements” include intimate involvement in major institutions including the Caribbean Public Health Agency (CARPHA) - which played a leading role in the COVID-19 pandemic - and the Caribbean Disaster Emergency Management Agency (CDEMA), to name just two.

Also consider the roles of the Caricom Implementation Agency for Crime and Security (IMPACS), the Caribbean Examinations Council (CXC), and the Caribbean Agricultural Research and Development Institute (CARDI).

There are others that play leading roles in important areas such as climate change, telecommunications, renewable energy, regional standards and quality setting, tourism, fisheries, and meteorology.

Now, if you find the time ahead of the World Cup Final, have a look at the communiqué emerging from the 51st Caricom Heads meeting in Saint Lucia last week.

There, you will find joint reflections on some of the more urgent matters of today, not the least being Caribbean's vulnerabilities and hazards that are transnational in nature. Consider the impact on our southern coastline from the earthquakes in Venezuela.

Hurricanes also do not respect maritime boundaries. Criminal networks move across jurisdictions. Climate finance negotiations are conducted in global fora where numbers matter. Digital transformation cannot be addressed through fragmented national policies. Food insecurity is shaped by conflicts occurring thousands of miles away.

Implicit in these observations alone, you find that the argument for integration has become stronger, not weaker.

At a time of deep geopolitical turbulence, climate vulnerability, democratic uncertainty and technological disruption, the proposition that some of us should somehow retreat from integration is not merely mistaken. It is absurd.

Importantly, and as I pointed out last week right here, the politics of integration do not match the energy and aspirations of young people and ordinary citizens.

The Caricom project also includes a considerable workload of unfinished business – most of which is specifically relevant to our ability to engage current and emerging challenges. We are horsing around with this at our peril, T&T!

Youth beyond seats at tables

I suspect few others noticed, before now, that the sharpest metaphor delivered at the 51st Caricom Summit in Saint Lucia came not from one of the political veterans, but from an eloquent participant in a largely overlooked Youth Dialogue.

I had been in active pursuit of alternative material for today’s dispatch - outside of the vexing, familiar themes of human rights blindness, racism, abundantly resourced online disinformation, steelpan disrespect, and overall official folly. They are all adequately covered elsewhere on today’s pages, I am certain.

Sunday, we had more than a small hint of what to expect when young Saint Lucian scholar, Rahym Augustin-Joseph, called on Caricom leaders to treat young people as partners in shaping the region's future rather than as passive beneficiaries of policy.

Then, on Monday, we heard Shakiah Lewis of Turks and Caicos at the dialogue. A teacher who serves as dean of the Caricom Youth Ambassador Programme, she delivered the telling line.

Emerging leaders, she argued, need to move from “asking for a seat at the table to building the table.”

I had followed much of what had transpired the previous afternoon at the launch of the summit and tried to capture as much as I subsequently could from regional media dispatches. Augustin-Joseph’s address continued to resonate as lasting memory not readily engraved in news pages.

While official attention shifted to Monday's contentious regional retreat and the plenary that followed, Lewis offered an arresting vision of constructive youth defiance.

Shakia Lewis, Turks and Caicos

Strengthening the youth voice, she argued, “isn't just about giving young people a microphone.”

She called for a shift from advocacy to executive power instead of “youth panels” whose recommendations are filed and forgotten. Ministries and regional bodies, she added, should embed young leaders directly into the work itself, with a real say when policy is being drafted.

Chiming in supportively was 23-year-old, Bahamas-born Guyanese Caricom Youth Ambassador and journalist, Shaquawn Gill.

Shaquawn Gill of Guyana

“When we establish boards and we establish committees, organising committees and special committees,” he argued, “it must be in every legislative effort that there is a youth representative as part of any conversation that we have.”

“It must not be a tokenistic matter,” he said. “It must not happen because we have to fulfil this responsibility and we want to make it look nice that young people are in the room, but it has to be about a specific and dedicated effort to make sure that (they) are involved.”

Other contributors included Sherwyn Stephenson (no youngster), Caricom Programme Manager, Crime and Security, Moesha Allen of Jamaica, and moderator Crista St Ange of Saint Lucia.

True, some of what was said is challenged by a few facts. Guyana President, Irfaan Ali, first entered parliament at the age of 26 and he is currently the youngest Caricom leader at 46. Dickon Mitchell of Grenada is not far ahead at 48 and Terrence Drew of St Kitts and Nevis is 49.

More than "giving young people a microphone"

So yes, younger people have reached positions of leadership. Sat at the head of the table. Roosevelt Skerrit of Dominica became Prime Minister in 2004 at 31.

So, it appears that the youth challenge does not occur purely as a concern regarding people and their ages but rather involves entrenched systems and a modus operandi that require dismantling. This has clearly not been our experience.

The panellists, however, appeared to agree that a distinction needs to be made between being heard and being empowered at a fundamental level.

The sluggish regional pursuit of digitalisation – for which young experts are uniquely positioned to lead – was cited as a glaring example of a refusal to part from tirelessly-navigated trails.

“The question is not whether or not young people are ready to lead,” Allen suggested. “The question is whether the systems are ready to trust, include, and allow for us to take our places rightfully where we belong.”

The picture that emerged from the discussion was that this generation is not waiting for permission. As Lewis put it, the young "will not wait for a formal invitation. They will not wait in the back of the line. They will start to create their own lines.”

This, in a sense, is what is already happening through the embrace of digital platforms for alternative sources and routes to information and informal instruction by the young.

Perhaps the region will finally discover that re-modelling the table matters more than simply finding another seat.

Our Haitian test

The resolution on Haiti adopted at the OAS General Assembly two weeks ago may eventually be remembered less for what it promises than for what it quietly acknowledges: that Haiti’s crisis has become inseparable from the future stability of the wider hemisphere.

Such broader recognition is long overdue, even as Caricom appears to have intimately engaged the journey for some time now. This is particularly so when it comes to nearby member states Jamaica and The Bahamas. But visa requirements for Haitians remain intact in a majority of Caricom states.

For many years, responses in the wider Americas have oscillated between expressions of solidarity and carefully managed distance, including complete silence.

Haiti has often been treated as a country somehow detached from the mainstream, despite sharing a history of colonial exploitation, economic vulnerability, and democratic fragility.

The latest OAS resolution abandons some of that pretence. For example, it accepts that Haiti’s multidimensional crisis cannot be addressed through security measures alone.

The OAS hosted its 56th General Assembly in Panama

Instead, it links security, political consensus, humanitarian relief, institutional reform, and long-term development within a single hemispheric framework while insisting that these efforts remain Haitian-led and respectful of national sovereignty. Those are not insignificant departures, provided the declarants are serious.

For Caribbean governments, the resolution also reflects responsibilities extending beyond diplomatic endorsement and posturing, though we too have had our share of negligence and/or incapacity.

Caricom has already assumed a prominent, if not under-resourced role in the current period. It continues to participate in the Standing Group of Partners overseeing the Gang Suppression Force while facilitating political dialogue through its Eminent Persons Group while working alongside the OAS and United Nations on the Haiti Roadmap for Stability and Peace.

This represents perhaps the most sustained, multi-dimensional, regional engagement with Haiti in decades. Yet, as hemispheric representatives conceded in Panama, the implications reach beyond Port-au-Prince.

If the hemisphere accepts that organised criminal violence can overwhelm a neighbouring state without a broad, coordinated response, it effectively lowers the threshold for similar instability elsewhere.

The OAS Secretary General, Albert Ramdin, is strong on that point as no country in the hemisphere remains untouched by the hand of transnational crime. This is manifest in domestic turmoil and instability.

Firearms trafficking, illicit financial flows, irregular migration, human trafficking, and transnational organised crime recognise neither maritime boundaries nor diplomatic sensitivities.

The resolution therefore serves another purpose. It is not simply about rescuing Haiti. It is about strengthening regional resilience before comparable pressures become unmanageable elsewhere. There is evidence this is already emerging, if not already the established case.

"Haitian Bus" - Wesley Gibbings watercolour

Equally significant is the resolution’s insistence that elections, while essential, are not sufficient. Democratic legitimacy requires security, functioning institutions, credible electoral administration, humanitarian relief, and broad political consensus. It rejects the comforting fiction that simply holding a vote automatically restores democracy.

That lesson deserves attention throughout the OAS landscape and perhaps beyond.

Across the region, political polarisation is deepening. Public confidence in institutions is weakening. Criminal organisations continue expanding their influence. Economic pressures increasingly test governmental capacity. And states have not always acted in accordance with accepted international human rights norms.

These may differ in degree from Haiti’s circumstances, but not necessarily in direction.

There is also another subtle message within the OAS resolution. It repeatedly emphasises transparency, coordination and accountability - not only for Haiti itself but also for the international agencies intervening there. It demands regular reporting, institutional review, and clearer coordination among the OAS, the United Nations, Caricom, and international partners.

This point represents an implicit admission that previous international interventions have often suffered from duplication, fragmented mandates, an absence of cultural awareness, and inadequate oversight.

People of the Caribbean should welcome that honesty.

Too often, external assistance has arrived in Haiti accompanied by competing priorities and short political attention spans. Sustainable recovery requires coherence rather than episodic interventions responding to successive emergencies.

Ultimately, this resolution asks governments to think differently about regional security itself.

Security can no longer be confined to military or policing responses. It now encompasses functioning democratic institutions, social inclusion, economic opportunity, humanitarian protection, and effective governance. Those elements reinforce one another.

Whether the new roadmap succeeds remains uncertain. Haiti has witnessed many ambitious international commitments before.

But failure this time would not belong to Haiti alone.

Rickey Singh memory bridges the Americas

Less than a year following his death, pioneering Caribbean journalist Rickey Singh remained a powerful presence in hemispheric media circles on June 22, as leading journalists gathered on the margins of the 56th OAS General Assembly in Panama to discuss a new initiative bearing his name.

Initiated by outgoing Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), Pedro Vaca, the “Rickey Singh Initiative for Journalistic Excellence in the Americas” was explored by hemispheric media leaders.

Special Rapporteur, Pedro Vaca

A “manifesto” prescribing “new ethics of communication” was presented by Mónica González, President of the Colombia-based Fundación Gabo, named for the late Nobel laureate, Colombian journalist/writer, Gabriel García Márquez.

 She stressed the importance of meeting the journalistic requirements of a new era of communication and introduced a journalistic “manifesto” and a discussion paper entitled: “Reinventing Ourselves - Key Pillars for Upholding Excellence in Journalism.”

 Barbadian attorney, human rights activist and former IACHR commissioner, Roberta Clarke, suggested that the initiative had the potential to address a “blind spot” in relations between the Latin American and Caribbean sub-regions.

 She said there had been recent efforts to “deepen the Commission’s understanding of the Caribbean and to encourage greater participation by Caribbean states and civil society.”

 “The IACHR was perceived as not doing the work to understand the Caribbean and the challenges and achievements in constructing democracies given the political and economic legacies of extreme violence and inequalities based on ethnicity,” Clarke added.

Attorney/human rights activist, Roberta Clarke

She said: “The Rickey Singh story is not only about journalism; it is about courage, the importance of information to democracy, the insistence on state accountability and a commitment to the Caribbean identity.”

 IACHR human rights consultant and daughter of the late Guyana-born journalist, Wendy Singh, described some of the challenges faced by her father, including exile from his home country and difficulties in both T&T and Barbados.

Caribbean participants at the Panama event included senior journalists from the Dominican Republic, Guyana, Suriname, and Trinidad and Tobago.

Human rights consultant and daughter, Wendy Singh 

Journalists and press freedom activists also came from Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, Peru, and Venezuela.

 The Initiative is due for formal introduction at the annual Gabo Festival currently underway in in Bogotá, Colombia.

 

 

The Charter we ignored

It is unfortunate that not many of us who have followed integration matters over the years have been reminding regional leaders and policymakers about the hollow PR that accompanied adoption of the Caricom Charter of Civil Society (CCS) almost 30 years ago.

In previous dispatches, I have - correctly or incorrectly at the technical level - described the statement of principles and values as our unratified but collective Caribbean “bill of rights.”

Yet, the enlightened intervention of 1997 remained largely neglected, referenced fleetingly in speeches, but seldom treated as a living instrument capable of shaping public policy or actively protecting citizens.

Had such disregard not been the case, we could well have settled numerous intra-regional and even domestic quarrels by reference to what can be summarised as a shared commitment to democracy, human rights, due process, transparency, participation, and social justice.

The recent Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) judgment in the Derek Ramsamooj case has the potential to finally change that.

Judges of the Caribbean Court of Justice

Essentially, T&T political scientist, Ramsamooj, asserted that the rights accorded to Caricom nationals under the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas (RTC) are not effective without the protection of fundamental human rights, specifically those rights articulated in the Charter.

True, the CCJ ruling does not magically transform the Charter into a legally binding treaty. Indeed, the judges expressly rejected that proposition. However, they also dispelled the notion that it is merely a symbolic declaration to gather dust on government shelves.

Instead, the Court found that the Charter serves as an important guide to interpreting Community law and identifying the general principles that underpin the Caricom project.

That distinction is enormously significant - at least for those of us who have advocated for the CCS to be recognisable as a basis for assertion of human rights at law.

I followed the situation with Ramsamooj from the start and did not feel overly confident that this aspect of his claim would have emerged as a decisive factor.

For years, regional governments displayed remarkable tardiness in advancing the Charter’s objectives. Successive Caricom Summits endorsed its principles, yet little effort was made to embed them systematically in regional governance.

The result has been an integration movement exclusively focused on markets, trade, and functional cooperation while paying insufficient attention to the human rights dimensions of development.

The Ramsamooj judgment revealed why this matters. Regional governments should sit up and take careful note. Those here in T&T who continue to proclaim the untruth that “we not in de CCJ” should also be particularly interested, as the matter was adjudged under the Court’s Original Jurisdiction to which all Member States are subject.

The judges relied on the CCS, together with national constitutions and international human rights instruments, to identify a region-wide baseline of rights and freedoms.

They recognised that RTC rights are meaningless if governments can at the same time restrict personal liberty, deny due process, or limit access to representation without adequate safeguards.

Ramsamooj was detained and had his passport confiscated by Surinamese authorities between 2020 and 2022. He was charged in 2020, five months into his detention, with a variety of offences including fraud and money laundering.

He had also been subjected to a Dutch-derived legal procedure known as “beperking”, or restriction, which gives authorities power to limit communication between a detainee and the outside world during an investigation.

In Ramsamooj’s case, this served to deny him direct access to legal counsel during critical stages of his detention and interrogation. He was also questioned in Dutch through a translator and signed documents in a language he did not understand.

The CCJ concluded that such application of the “beperking” procedure breached Community law. The judges found that freedom of movement and other treaty rights cannot be exercised effectively unless they are accompanied by minimum human rights protections.

Among these is the right of an accused person to have access to legal counsel of his or her choice. The judges noted that this right is entrenched in the constitutions of all Caricom member states and has effectively become a “regional customary standard.”

Based on this particular feature of the ruling, the Court awarded Ramsamooj US$30,000 in damages.

The Ramsamooj decision should signal that the era of human rights as secondary to economic integration may change. Caricom nationals who move, work, invest, and provide services across the region now have judicial confirmation that certain minimum standards should accompany those freedoms.

The CCS may still lack formal binding force, but the CCJ has made clear that its values matter.

OAS at the crossroads

Next week's 56th Regular Session of the Organization of American States (OAS) General Assembly convenes at a pivotal moment in hemispheric affairs, with several unfolding, interlocking developments bearing profound implications for regional relations and the Caribbean's place within all this.

These are not ordinary times. Here in our region, and perhaps everywhere else, a declining appetite for multilateral cooperation and action is accompanied by a reduction in the capacity to engage through both economic participation and enthusiastic political will.

It may well be that the latter persists as a by-product of cynical, hegemonic purpose and design and/or a growing inclination to singularly favour the transactional demands of domestic social and economic disequilibrium.

Within Caricom, there also appears to be a belief in the dispensability of a Caribbean paradigm that witnesses common cause and action. Even the colonial experience found value in geographical cohesion and joint endeavour.

Whatever the case, the hemispheric grouping founded on great hope in 1948 now faces a defining test of its relevance and effectiveness as a point of reliable resort at times when peace and security appear at stake.

For this reason, the outcomes of the June 22-24 General Assembly have the potential to be seminal in the framing of a renewed mandate and focus. There are several key issues, but those with profound, immediate impact include prevailing geopolitical tensions, sustainable financing of the organisation, and institutional reform.

The 55th General Assembly
hosted by Antigua and Barbuda (OAS Photo)

Secretary-General, Albert Ramdin, has already sounded the relevant alerts to reactivate an OAS that is “more agile, transparent, and results-oriented and better equipped to respond to Member States’ needs in a rapidly evolving geopolitical environment.”

It appears however that the requirements of such ambitions reside substantially in the will of member countries to decisively address some lingering, vexatious past and contemporary issues.

For example, and to invite the cat to pigeons’ quarters, the membership status of Cuba (now attracting aggressive, potentially violent attention from the US) should be regularised, and the situations regarding Venezuela and Nicaragua revisited.

Cuba’s membership, for example, is recognised for its non-participation in OAS processes since 1962. It never actually quit the movement. (Just, by the way and on another note, Cuba as far as I know has never expressed an active interest in full formal membership of Caricom.)

Nicaragua withdrew its membership in 2023, and Venezuela has been the subject of an on-and-off again relationship.

In 2017, then Foreign Minister (now Acting President) Delcy Rodríguez announced her country’s withdrawal. In 2019, through the Juan Guaidó fiasco, they were on again. Now, more recently, Rodríguez has asserted that Venezuela is no longer a member of the organisation. It’s complicated. Hopefully, this will be openly and honestly discussed in Panama.

Haiti meanwhile remains in the fold but is a major humanitarian concern and one for which there appears to be no readily available resolution.

The other major, but not entirely unrelated issue, is financing of the organisation’s 2027 budget. The United States typically accounts for close to 50% of such funds. Total expenditure in 2025 was US$165.2 million even as the USA “paused” its contributions for 90 days “pending review.” This followed an executive order to that effect.

For 2027, the Trump administration has, significantly, sought no funding for the country’s assessed contribution to the organisation. Several smaller contributors, such as T&T, are reportedly in arrears of their financial obligations.

There is also the corresponding imperative to ensure the OAS runs a much tighter ship. A May 2026 US Congressional Research Brief identifies the inter-connectedness of the key challenges of geopolitics, finance, and institutional capacity.

OAS Secretary General, Albert Ramdin
(OAS Photo)

“Since the early 2000s,” the brief says, “increased ideological polarisation among member states has made it more difficult to establish a common hemispheric agenda. In addition, member states have repeatedly assigned new responsibilities to the OAS without providing commensurate increases in funding.”

In the budget document prepared for next week's Assembly, Ramdin argues that discussion of the organisation's future “will require balancing ambition with fiscal responsibility, ensuring that political objectives are adequately aligned with operational capacity.

“We hope that we can unite around the principle that effective delivery requires investment, and without sufficient human and financial resources, mandates cannot be fulfilled. Making the OAS relevant again thus becomes unattainable.”

There must be acknowledgement of the fact, though, that there will not be another transformative 1948. The turbulent tides have come and gone and come again, in changed directions and intensities. This General Assembly might well prove to be a key make or break moment.

Emergency powers and public trust

As fate would have it, this column is being published the very day the government proposes to seek parliamentary approval for an extension of the current State of Emergency (SoE). This will apply for three months beyond its June 17 expiration.

A statement from the Office of the Attorney General last Sunday indicated that support for the decision derives in part from an impact assessment related to SoEs spanning the period December 2024 to May 2026.

This criss-crosses political administrations and, hopefully, the ensuing discussions will extend beyond the temptation to contrast and compare, with querulous, partisan points in mind.

Instead, it is to be hoped that an honest, thorough explanation of the manner in which such an intervention has been able, in the past and today, to satisfy all constitutional and good governance benchmarks and to meet valid objectives.

The AG, as a professor of law, would have more than once elaborated to his students the key pre-conditions set out under Sections 8-10 of the Constitution and all the important features that distinguish their extraordinary nature.

Section 8 contains the substantive grounds for declaring an SoE, while Sections 9 and 10 address duration and parliamentary oversight.

The public needs to understand the broad circumstances contemplated by the Constitution: war or imminent war; natural disaster, epidemic, or similar calamity; and serious threats to public safety or essential services – the latter being cited in this instance.

Recourse to an SoE generally unsettles people with a concern for the maintenance of human rights in all its facets, mainly but not solely through the stated rationale, and the framing and application of accompanying regulations. This is important since it focuses on the performance of official agencies entrusted with their enforcement.

Within that context, the role of state security agencies is deemed singularly important – the police service and military in particular.

The citizenry is fully entitled to closely scrutinise this feature of SoE implementation. And the issues to which people and their representative civic institutions should pay the greatest attention.

Sometimes it is difficult to maintain clear focus through the haze of partisanship and political sycophancy. But responsible broader community intervention should routinely occur to bring under sharp scrutiny some key attributes of police and other official behaviour.

As discussed in last week’s edition of this column, public trust is indispensable when it comes to state actions that impinge on civil liberties and require us to concede otherwise protected space.

It starts with pervasive confidence in the soundness of a decision to travel such a path. I cannot say this is either universal or completely immune from irrationality in either support or opposition. Whatever prevailing predispositions, there is a case to be respectfully and competently made.

There are several key actors in the management of public emergencies, and the executive is only one of them. Let’s focus on another principal player, the Police.

The Police of Trinidad and Tobago at work

I have not heard any arguments against the view that a comprehensive remodelling of the police service, as currently constituted, is absolutely required to bring it in line with modern realities and challenges, and consequently to render this agency of the state wholly trustworthy under an SoE.

The slothful path being taken to recognise the value of body cameras is a simple example. The prohibitive default posture when it comes to public dissent is another.

But there are wider, already acknowledged shortfalls on questions of criminal detection rates and, even further, eventual conviction within the framework of our criminal justice system.

As it is – and to cite just one issue - there is a more likely chance than not of a criminal getting away with murder. This is even when there are more sharply focused laws, harsher penalties, and even emergency powers to skip some elements of legal processes.

The experience of the latest round of SoE conditions appears to reinforce the point. Impunity remains the norm however rigid, even fatal, the application of regulations.

There is also a need for greater transparency and accountability by the TTPS, and the equipping and positioning of the Police Complaints Authority and other agencies to ensure this is achieved when things appear to go wrong.

Persistent concerns remain regarding corruption, poor professional standards, and the need to strengthen police-community relations.

None of these is irrelevant to how emergency powers are administered and accepted by law-abiding citizens.

Hopefully, some guidance will be provided in the House of Representatives today. It’s the least we should all expect.