Tower Hill inquiry spares security forces
The situation boiled over like an overheated radiator that just had its cap removed. And while almost a year has gone by since the rocks, bottles and bullets flew outside of Orange Walk, an official report on the incident now has some major accusations flying.
Janelle Chanona, Reporting
The unbelievable images captured at the Tower Hill Bridge on July thirtieth, 2001 have been permanently etched into Belizean history. But on Wednesday, a new chapter was added, one that condemns not only the actions of the crowd and bus operator, but also officials of the Transport Department.
According to Christopher Blackman, chairman of the commission appointed to investigate the incident, the day of troubles could have been avoided.
Justice Christopher Blackman, Chair, Commission of Inquiry
“Everything that happened the thirtieth of July 2001 were reactive and as a result not properly executed or implemented.”
In a written report submitted to the Prime Minister earlier this week, the three-member commission lay the blame on several parties. The most damning blow was dealt to Transport Commissioner Glenn Arthurs who was called to testify twice.
Christopher Blackman
“It became apparent at that new hearing that Mr. Arthurs had really learnt very little. We offered him opportunity to submit proposals to us as to how to improve the transport system. Up to now, he has not responded to that invitation. And when review the evidence as a whole, taking his attitude into account, we came to the conclusion that he seemed singularly intransigent…his views were the only views that mattered.”
The commission has not only asked for a complete reform of transport policies, they’ve gone so far as to recommend to government that Arthurs be removed from office and relocated elsewhere in the public service. And the other transport officials on the bridge that day weren’t let off the hook either.
Christopher Blackman
“I remember Mr. Varela taking the view that they were going to be liable if the buses were allowed to run because their permits had expired. Bunkum. Absolute bunkum. The fact they had no proper permits was no reason why they couldn’t be allowed to run on the road, just stop them and charge them. Every officer had a right to charge them that day for running without a permit; there is no need to precipitate an incident. There was no liability on the Transport Department because somebody runs without a permit. The onus will fall on the permit holder in respect for any incident that occurs. But there is too much and probably still too much of the determination to micro-manage.”
(Soldier firing above the crowd…police throwing stones back at the crowd)
But perhaps the most surprising finding of the inquiry was that not only did the security forces on the bridge that day act reasonably, they actually showed extreme restraint.
Justice Christopher Blackman
“The bottom-line is that the police had no equipment. Many police officers had no crowd control, no guns, no batons and there was a breakdown in order on the part of those police officers. But they had no weapons to defend themselves other than what they resorted to, the only people who had weapons that day were the B.D.F. personnel.”
“The fact that there was not probably greater bloodshed was more due to restraint on the part of the defence force personnel than the reticence of the crowd. The crowd was really being agitated, probably by forces outside the control of even those who started out to be the innocent commuters on that day.”
The commissioners say it is the responsibility of the government to outfit the Police Department with the necessary gear, and gave specific examples.
Justice Christopher Blackman
“We said that equipment should include water cannons with marking dye so we could pick up those people who are offending. But we don’t think that there is any suggestion that…we would like to feel that the defence force would be used as a first resort and to use firearms as a first resort.”
As for the members of the crowd who acted violently, Justice Blackman says anyone who can be identified should be brought to justice.
Justice Christopher Blackman
“The fact that there might have been breeches on how the riot proclamation was made to them did not make it any less a riot assembly. And therefore the police should, if they can, and are in a position to do so, prosecute them.”
And what of people who were at the centre of this whole incident? Bus owner Amelio Tillett role in the controversy has been deemed provocative.
Justice Christopher Blackman
“In our judgement, the judgement of all the commissioners, Mr. Tillett contributed to what happened. He tried to give the impression of being an innocent victim of circumstances…we don’t accept that and we think he should be censured for contributing, albeit behind the scenes, to the incident that occurred.”
Overall, the commission of inquiry has made seven suggestions to the Government, all with the intention of preventing such an incident from happening again. With problems over bus service once again threatening to boil over, government may ignore the report at its peril. Reporting for News 5, I am Janelle Chanona.
The two other members of the commission of inquiry were Sherman Zuniga and Father Lazarus Augustine. While the executive summary of the report has been released, the full version has not yet been laid before Cabinet. Once that happens, the Prime Minister may make all or part available to the public.
