WHEN the allegations over possible corruption in the ranks of the police force emerged, we wrote in this column of the need for transparency in the investigation.

At the time, a press conference was to be held by Police Commissioner Clayton Fernander to brief the public on the way forward. That has since been held – and with much talk in the answers of not wanting to preempt the investigation that is to take place.                       

That is, of course, very valid – but that does not prevent discussion of the scale and scope of the investigation itself.

Since then, more has emerged – and there has been the very disturbing development that the person who first aired the voice notes that has sparked the investigation being shot and injured in the US. Prime Minister Philip “Brave” Davis has noted that he finds the voice notes terribly disturbing. Commissioner Fernander has talked of analysing the voice notes for background sounds that can bring more information – although it is the voices in the foreground that carry the allegations of most concern, of course. Two of the men on those voice notes – Dino Smith and Michael Fox, Jr – have since been murdered. Each of them shot dead. One was shot as he arrived at a residence by three masked men, the other in his car on Prince Charles Drive as he gave a friend a ride to work.                       

A parent of each of those men has now spoken to The Tribune – each said their sons had told them about the existence of the voice notes prior to their deaths.

Each said that they recognised the voices of their sons on the notes. The shooting in the US adds another thread, with the US authorities doubtless investigating that and any connections there may be.                                                               

With regard to the investigation here at home, it must be empowered to probe to the highest levels. Empowered does not just mean having the authority, but having the confidence that officers will be able to investigate officers who are more senior without consequence.

The Police Act gives the Commissioner and any police officer of or above the rank of Assistant Superintendent the same powers as a magistrate under the criminal code to summon and enforce the attendance of witnesses and examine them under oath – and anyone found to be willfully giving false evidence can be deemed to be guilty of perjury. There has been discussion about outside involvement with bodies from the US and the UK but not as yet details of what that would be.                       

The public must also be confident in the investigation – and that the branch chosen to handle it is fit to do so. Its history has not been one to suggest it is necessarily the best equipped for such a task, which will do nothing to quell calls for a full Commission of Inquiry into the matter.

And, of course, at the end of all of this we also must say there is a presumption of innocence. The investigation must be clear and open-sighted and deliver an outcome that is fair. Transparency can only serve to bolster confidence in the police. Indeed, anything less than transparency would ill serve such confidence.

It is still early in this process – we should not expect instant results, far from it. But this must remain in the public eye and it must not be drawn out longer than it needs to be.

There are other matters before the Commissioner that have been awaiting a decision for a considerable time now – we should not still be waiting and being told “stand by” on those matters, and we absolutely must not do so on this matter. It must be treated with the gravity it deserves. We hope it shall be.