Private security firms warned by GPF over trafficking and firearms offenses


Private security companies were warned last Saturday by the Guyana Police Traffic Service (GPF) against using sirens and flashing lights on their vehicles in violation of the country’s laws.

A statement released by the GPF said that during a meeting at the police officer training center, traffic chief Superintendent Dennis Stephen told private security companies that “security vehicles are not considered “emergency vehicles” such as those used by police, fire, and ambulance. Private security services should therefore obey all applicable traffic laws and regulations and refrain from using vehicles equipped with sirens and/or flashing lights.

The GPF has urged companies to regularly check their weapons and accept responsibility for the actions of their employees, as there has been an increase in cases requiring the intervention of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID).

Deputy Commissioner Operations (ag) Ravindradat Budhram also addressed private companies and said: “While it is the responsibility of private companies to provide quality service to their clients, it is also essential to improve training in their organization…”

Budhram went on to say that many breaches have taken place with regards to securing guns. He noted that when security personnel are relieved of their duties or even while on duty, firearms security is not in accordance with standard operating procedure (SOP) which he said must be immediately rectified.

As a result of these breaches, Budhram encouraged both owners and their senior managers to conduct frequent trainings within their organizations to supplement the effectiveness of their departments. He also said his office “will coordinate refresher training for members of the security sector.” The Deputy Commissioner (ag) of the GPF said that once these breaches are resolved, the private security industry can make a valuable contribution to the security of the country. But the deputy commissioner (ag) warned that if they were to continue, private security firms could be placed under “unique governance issues” that will ultimately hamper development.


Comments are closed.