Commissioner of Police Clifton Hicken has rescinded an earlier decision granting Deputy Commissioner of Police and Head of the Special Organised Crime Unit (SOCU), Fazil Karimbaksh, leave ahead of his retirement, following questions over the legal authority to make such a decision.
In a letter dated October 12, 2026, Hicken informed Karimbaksh that he was withdrawing his previous correspondence of October 7, which had granted the senior officer leave.
“I hereby rescind and withdraw my previous letter by which leave was granted to you with immediate effect,” Hicken stated.
The Commissioner said the reversal followed further consideration of the constitutional and legal framework governing the office of Deputy Commissioner of Police, particularly the respective powers of the President, Police Service Commission (PSC) and Commissioner of Police.
According to Hicken, the October 7 letter will therefore cease to have effect, while any further action concerning the granting of leave will have to be undertaken by the appropriate authority in keeping with the Constitution and applicable law.
The reversal came amid a dispute between Karimbaksh and the Commissioner over his leave and his reported exclusion from his SOCU office.
In separate correspondence dated October 12, attorney-at-law Rizwan Mohamed, acting on Karimbaksh’s behalf, formally objected to his client’s reported exclusion from SOCU and threatened urgent court proceedings if the restriction remained in place without a lawful basis.
Mohamed said Karimbaksh was informed at approximately 08:40 hrs that morning that Senior Superintendent Singh had been directed to prevent him from entering his SOCU office.
The attorney argued that the reported instruction went beyond the arrangements contained in Hicken’s October 7 letter, which dealt with 174 days of annualised vacation leave prior to retirement and stated that the leave should commence on November 8, 2026.
According to Mohamed, the earlier letter did not authorise Karimbaksh’s immediate exclusion from office on October 12.
“My client protests this reported instruction in the strongest terms and disputes your authority to exclude him from the discharge of his duties on the basis presently disclosed,” the attorney wrote.
Mohamed also contended that no separate written decision had been provided placing Karimbaksh on administrative leave, suspending him or otherwise setting out the basis and conditions for preventing him from accessing his office.
He argued that the Commissioner’s powers under the Police Act must be exercised within constitutional limits, pointing to the disciplinary jurisdiction of the Police Service Commission.
The attorney demanded that Hicken provide a written response by 16:00 hrs on October 12 confirming whether he had issued or authorised the exclusion, the legal authority being relied upon, and whether the measure amounted to administrative leave, suspension or an access restriction.
He also demanded that Karimbaksh’s access to his office and ability to perform his duties be restored unless lawful grounds for the restriction could be established.
Mohamed maintained that his client remained ready and available to perform his lawful duties and warned that if the exclusion continued without an established legal foundation, urgent court proceedings would be filed seeking, among other things, interim relief, declarations and orders concerning the decision.
Hicken’s subsequent letter withdrawing the earlier leave decision did not address in detail the reported restriction on Karimbaksh’s access to his SOCU office.
