NATIONAL Security Minister Fitzgerald Hinds disagreed with a claim from Oropouche West MP Dave Tancoo that all of the over 300 people involved in an unauthorised public protest at the Queen's Park Savannah on January 16, were there to peacefully protest against covid19 public health regulations.

He also said the evidence provided to him by the police, showed that officers on the scene acted legally when they used tear gas to disperse elements of the crowd which had become unruly. Hinds made these statements during a matter raised by Tancoo on the adjournment of the House of Representatives on Friday.

Tancoo said prayer, peaceful intentions and constitutional rights were the only weapons which the protesters had. He claimed none of the protesters acted violently against the police. Tancoo also said out of 12 people detained from that protest on January 16, one person was charged with an offence which had nothing to do with violence. He criticised the police for using tear gas on protesters.

In response, Hinds said the Government understood the distress experienced by some people at the protest when tear gas was used to disperse the crowd. But he added, "The response of some sections of the society in the aftermath of this incident was not entirely surprising. Neither was the call by some to ban the use of tear gas by members of police service as a means of crowd control."

To Tancoo's claim that all of the protesters had peaceful intentions, Hinds said, "Law enforcement is able to distinguish between the trees from the forest."

Among the members of the crowd, he continued, "I am advised by the police, there are elements and agendas that go well and far beyond covid19 regulations and any objections to them."

Hinds told MPs, "These matters would have been gaining the attention of law enforcement, long, long time before the advent of covid19 in this country and in this world. Both at home and abroad."

Regarding one person who was charged in relation to the protest, Hinds said,"That matter is still, from my advice, under investigations. The police are looking for justiciable evidence." He did not know what could happen if such evidence was found. The police were also well empowered under the Summary Offences Act to disburse any public protest.

Defending the approach used by officers of the Guard and Emergency Branch (GEB) to deal with the protest, Hinds said, "I am reliably informed by the GEB that there was continuous communication over a period of approximately two hours with protesters, urging and imploring them to discontinue that illegal process."

He agreed with the police's position that some protesters threw bottles and other objects at GEB officers.

"This is tantamount to an assault (on a police officer). Under Section 59 of the Police Service Act, people who assault or restrict police officers in the conduct of their duties or incite others to do so, are liable on summary conviction to a fine of $10,000 and two years in jail.