Delays in Police Investigations [1998] VUOM 20; 1998.20 (30 September 1998)

REPUBLIC OF VANUATU
OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN

PUBLIC REPORT

ON THE

DELAYS IN POLICE INVESTIGATIONS

30 September 1998

-------------------------------------

PREAMBLE

'... Be of the same mind one toward another; mind not high kings, but condescend to men of low estate; be not wise in your own conceits. Provide things honest in the sight of all men. Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.'

Romans ch. 12 v 16 - 21

One of the most disturbing aspects of the conduct of the Police Service is the evidence that emerged revealing the fact that the police were quick to arrest and prosecute when it suited them for example, more than 500 'offenders' who had attacked and resisted the police during the VNPF troubles in less than 2 weeks. Moreover, it also became apparent that selected other cases are dealt with quickly. There is clear evidence of reluctance to take any kind of action against anyone in the category of 'big men' while 'small people' were pursued.

It is obvious that priority in these matters is very much a disorderly and unfair gamble, and is symptomatic of the undisciplined and unbalanced attitudes which arise from lack of training, discipline and good example. This results in a growing lack of confidence in the police.

It is time that a new training philosophy was put in place to raise the standard of performance as well as police morale and behaviour.

SUMMARY

On 10 September 1996 the Office of the Ombudsman, on its own initiative, commenced an enquiry into the conduct of the Vanuatu Police Force relating to the continuous delays in police investigations, in particular to major misappropriation cases and one assault case. The accused included government leaders, and political advisers.

Police admitted that these cases had not been passed on for prosecution for a variety of reasons. Police took up to seven years to complete investigations.

The Ombudsman found that standard procedures for recording, investigation and supervision were not enforced. The Ombudsman also found that the police failed to carry out their duties, the Officer-In-Charge of Criminal Investigation Department ('OIC CID') did not supervise these investigations properly and investigations were delayed for unjustified reasons.