iNews Cayman received a copy of a bill a local man, Dennis Warren Jr., has just received for the amount of $29,000 in connection with a legal case over whether the RCIPS had the rights to enter his home. Mr. Warren believed the the police did not have the lawful right to go into his home at will because he held a firearms licence and that the commissioner was overstepping the boundaries of his office. Warren said that the case was not about money or even about owning firearms, but it was a civil rights test that questioned how much leeway the police have to make regulations and policy themselves that stretch the parameters of existing legislation.

Because he said he did not have the monies to have a lawyer to represent him in court, he fought the legal case himself and lost. Warren’s assertion was the inspection the police wanted to make of his home was unlawful as such a regulation could only be made by the Governor in Cabinet, but the commissioner of police had made it a requirement as a matter of policy. By doing so, he had acted outside the scope of his authority, Warren had argued in court. The commissioner’s case was that he wanted to make sure the firearm was placed in a secure location.

In the UK, it is a requirement that to obtain a firearms licence the police can inspect your premises at any time. You know this beforehand. I do not know whether this requirement is known beforehand here. I suspect not because of Mr. Warren’s position in bringing this case.

The Court of Appeal found that the police commissioner does have absolute discretion whether or not to grant licences and so had the right to make an inspection a condition. The high court said that the commissioner had to be satisfied that the circumstances for a licence to be granted were met in the public interest.

Although sympathising with Mr. Warren, I do not find the Commissioner’s requirement in issuing a firearms licence to be unreasonable. Surely, the public needs to know that dangerous weapons are locked securely away in someone’s premises and not sitting on a table?

I do, however, take Mr. Warren’s point that after he has been presented with a horrifying bill, it could deter other members of the public bringing cases against the authorities when they genuinely believe a wrong has been committed against them.