ComPol Says Same Principle Was Applied to Nah Case  

Williams stood firm on his decision, emphasizing the seriousness of the offense. He believed that Reid was properly informed of his arrest and that the principles of natural justice were followed. Williams explained that he used his discretion to dismiss Reid due to the severity of the incident.  Williams says that the same principle was applied in the case involving Elmer Nah.

 

Chester Williams, Commissioner of Police

“He would have been notified of the complaint when it happened, through the diary where he was instructed to give a duty report, which he provided a duty report. And again, there is straight law that in circumstances where a person is aware of the reason for their arrest, there is no need for the police to tell them. That is, there have been case laws on that. Now, following the tribunal hearing, again, with a view to ensure that the principle of natural justice was adhered to.  I did similar to what I did in a cases where the legal office wrote the then explain to him  the process in terms of the nature of the offense that he was convicted for  and requested from him reasons why in light of the gravity of the offense, he has been convicted for, he should not be dismissed, and I think he was given seven days to respond to that notice. He responded to that notice that respond came to me. I read his response. I took it into consideration and uh having read his response and uh look at the nature of the offense. I exercise my discretion in dismissing him on the basis that the response given was not satisfactory, right? And so for the council to have said that natural justice was not followed, that’s not true. And importantly, he also said that the nature of the offense was indeed a serious one, which, in fact, he agreed with me then, that the offense is a serious one.  And as such – but his issue was basically that the natural justice principle was not adhered to, which in fact, we did adhere to. The principle of natural justice. We did that in our case and you all saw how the court ruled on that.”