There has been a lot of talk recently both in the Cayman Islands media and in the Legislative Assembly (LA) concerning the Royal Cayman Islands Police Service (RCIPS) investigating the leak of documents that concern government activity and public owned companies

Last week it was revealed that, rather foolishly, the RCIPS attempted to interview outspoken Independent North Side MLA Ezzard Miller a few weeks ago whilst he was sitting down drinking coffee at a coffee house. Miller said a stranger approached him, identified himself as a police officer and told him he was investigating the leaked agreement between the NRA, Dart and government relating to the West Bay Road projects and the ForCayman deal.

Miller refused to talk to him on the street but agreed to go to the police headquarters. It was there he discovered the Financial Crimes Unit was conducting the investigation, although the officers could not identify what crime exactly had been committed. They said the enquiry was about a breach of protocol at worst.

The MLA told the police he had received the document in the mail and made it known that he believed “this was a colossal waste of government resources at a time when crime levels are as high as they are. It is absurd to have police spending money trying to find out how a document, which should have been in public arena even before it was signed, made its way into my hands.”

He was required to give a statement even though he was not suspected of a crime and that there was, in fact, no criminal activity related to the leak. In his view it “was intimidation and an attempt to harass me when all I am doing is the people’s business.”

The RCIPS said, “”We can confirm that the RCIPS has received a complaint from the National Roads Authority, in relation to the possible disclosure of confidential documentation. An investigation into the matter is ongoing. In the course of the investigation we have spoken to about a dozen people so far. However, as the enquiry is active it would be inappropriate to comment further at this time.”

The police denied any harassment and issued a statement on Thursday (15) saying, “The RCIPS has a duty to investigate any complaint made alleging criminal conduct. The initial investigation involves the interviewing of any witnesses to ascertain if a crime has been committed. That investigation continues. However, we resent any suggestion that any of those witnesses have been ‘harassed’ by the RCIPS.”

So, who is right? When does investigating a complaint become harassment?

It is generally accepted the following actions can qualify as police harassment. Police have the authority and the duty to question people suspected of committing crimes. They also have the authority and duty to lawfully look for evidence regarding crimes and to arrest those they believe have committed crimes. There are some types of questioning, searches, and arrests, however, which may be considered harassment.
Questioning may qualify as harassment when it is arbitrary. Sometimes police officers will make a habit of stopping a certain person and demanding answers to random events, even when they do not suspect his involvement. This is often an abuse of power. The same type of situation can arise with search and seizure. An officer may act unlawfully by conducting an unwarranted search and confiscating items not used as part of an investigation.
An officer may have several reasons for harassing a person. For example, he may be trying to coerce the person to admit to his role in a crime or the officer may be trying to get information regarding an event that he believed a person witnessed. In any event, it does not make police harassment acceptable.
Police harassment is a situation that tends to be best handled by the judicial system. In many instances, police harassment may be found to be a violation of a person’s civil rights.

The police also encourage anyone who felt they have legitimate grounds for complaint about the RCIPS to contact the Professional Standards Unit to allow those allegations to be fully investigated.

Just from reading what happened, it would appear to me that Miller was not harassed. However, the way it was first conducted in a public place and to a well known figure, an MLA, could be considered bordering on being called harassment.

During last week’s proceedings in the LA, Premier Hon. McKeeva Bush raised the issue of the leak of a document to the press that outlined the terms of a possible agreement between the San Miguel Corporation and the airline it owns with Cayman Airways.

“It is downright treacherous what they did and whoever gave him (Miller) that document is treacherous but they will do anything to destroy government,” he said, as he indicated that government and the airline were going to make sure it was investigated.

The document revealed that Bush was in discussions behind closed doors to sell half of the national flag carrier!

Can Miller expect more “harassment” from the RCIPS if they are instructed to do the investigation on who stole the tarts – sorry – the documents.

It’s all a bit like Alice in Wonderland, isn’t it? I expect to hear any moment the premier shout “Off with his head!!”