GEORGETOWN, Guyana, Oct 12, CMC – Embattled Deputy Police Commissioner, Fizal Karimbaksh, who is accused of raping a female police officer, is questioning the decision to send him on administrative or pre-retirement leave pending the outcome of a probe because there is no functioning Police Service Commission (PSC).
“I further dispute your authority to place my client on compulsory administrative leave. On the legal basis presently disclosed, you have no lawful authority to impose such leave upon my client. No applicable statutory power or operative written delegation authorising that course has been identified or furnished,” said attorney Rizwaun Mohamed in a letter to Police Commissioner Clifton Hicken.
“Any purported exercise of disciplinary control must conform to article 212 of the Constitution; describing an enforced absence as administrative leave does not dispense with the requirement for lawful authority.”
Last week, the Guyana Police Force (GPF) confirmed that the Deputy Commissioner of Police had been sent on leave pending the outcome of the investigation into allegations of rape and threatening behaviour made against him.
The GPF said that the Police Commissioner of Police, following receipt of the report, established a team to conduct a thorough investigation into the allegations.
It said that additionally, the female Police Inspector who made the report has been transferred from the Special Organised Crime Unit (SOCU) to Regional Police Division 4 ‘A’.
“The Guyana Police Force wishes to assure the public that the allegations are being treated with the seriousness they warrant and that the investigation will be conducted professionally, impartially and in accordance with established procedures.”
But Karimbaksh, through his attorney’s letter dated October 7, is threatening to take legal action against the GPF if he is forced out of office ahead of his retirement in April 2027.
“You are hereby placed on unequivocal notice that, should you seek to compel my client to proceed on pre-retirement or administrative leave without lawful authority, I am instructed to institute legal proceedings without further notice, seeking urgent interim relief where necessary, together with all other appropriate relief and costs,” the attorney wrote.
The lawyer is also objecting to the Police Commissioner “compelling” his client to proceed on pre-retirement leave.
“For the avoidance of doubt, my client does not consent to compulsory pre-retirement leave on the basis presently advanced. He remains ready and available to discharge his duties and comply with lawful directions. His position must not be construed as acquiescence in an enforced absence, acceptance of the disputed leave calculation, or waiver of any right,” the lawyer said.
Karimbaksh is also disputing the duration of the annualised leave that he is entitled, saying that it is actually 118 days rather than 174 with the lawyer indicating that “the calculation and consequent commencement date are therefore expressly disputed”.
Karimbaksh is contending that the Commissioner of Police has no lawful authority to impose such leave on his client.
“No applicable statutory power or operative written delegation authorising that course has been identified or furnished. Any purported exercise of disciplinary control must conform to article 212 of the Constitution; describing an enforced absence as administrative leave does not dispense with the requirement for lawful authority”, the attorney wrote.
CMC/t/ir/2026