Daraine Luton, Staff Reporter 
McCalla
CONSTABLE CECIL McCalla, welfare officer at the Police Federation, is calling for an amendment of the Constabulary Force Act to allow government to be responsible for the medical expenses of retired police officers who were injured in the line of duty.
Mr. McCalla's call came
during a recent interview with The Sunday Gleaner.
"The act (Constabulary Force) speaks to officers injured in the line of duty but it says nothing about after
the person is retired.
"After he is retired on medical grounds or has reached retirement, the regulation does not speak to the Government giving any (medical) assistance to him," Cons. McCalla explained.
Part three of the Constabulary Force Act speaks to pensions, gratuities and disability allowances payable to a police officer. However, apart from his pension and gratuity allowance, no mention is made of Government being obligated to a policeman after retirement.
LIFE AFTER RETIREMENT
Not surprisingly, Superintendent Ivan Brown who heads community relations in Police Area 1, which covers the parishes of Trelawny, St. James, Westmoreland and Hanover, is concerned about life after retirement.
He was a young 25-year-old policeman on January 11, 1975, when he was called to Cottage in Westmoreland to settle a dispute between two farmers. Supt. Brown was attacked by one of the farmers who used a machete to cut off his right arm five inches below the elbow and the left arm six inches below the shoulder. He also received three machete wounds to the head.
Supt. Brown is 57 years old, which means that he has three years left in the force. For now, the Government foots his medical bills. But with his retirement on the horizon, Supt. Brown is searching for answers as to how he will manage when he becomes a retiree.
"When I retire, what forms of compensation will be there for me to continue living and not become a mendicant?
"How do I pay my medical bills after retirement?" he
questioned.
"I don't want to be a mendicant. I want to continue living a reasonable life which my pension will not be able to carry me on," the officer added.
Supt. Brown lamented that because of the injury he sustained he will not be able to drive himself in his retirement days. Neither can he paint his house nor cut his lawn like other retirees. He will have to pay to get these things done.
No wonder the Federation's Welfare Officer is so forthright in his call.
"The government should have some obligation to you after you are retire once you are not able to earn. Some policemen work after retirement but those seriously injured in the discharge of their service may not get this chance. They are robbed of the opportunity to earn after they have left the force," he said.
This is not the only bone of contention the Federation has with the government. It is hoping that police be seen as on duty in all circumstances.
As presently obtained, only on-duty police officers are eligible for compensation in the event of injury. Dependants of off-duty cop that are killed are not eligible for compensation money. Dependants of on-duty policemen killed since 2002 benefit from a $4 million compensation package from government. To date, though, only four such payment have been made.
Whether or not a policeman killed or injured is deemed off-duty is dependent on the circumstances. Attorneys-at-law points to the Clinton Bernard ruling, which they say best illustrates this.
In making the landmark ruling, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPYC) said a police is on duty if he is on his way to or from work and is injured or killed if there was a contract on his life and he is injured or killed.
Mr. Clinton Bernard was shot and injured in 1990 by a constable of the Jamaica Constabulary Force.
Bernard, who was 32 at the time, and his parents went to the Central Sorting Office in Kingston to make an overseas call. He joined a queue of about 15 people who were waiting to phone.
The constable in question, Paul Morgan announced "police" and demanded the phone which the plaintiff was then using. Bernard refused to hand over the phone and was shot in the head. The constable was dismissed on the ground that he had been absent from duty for over 48 hours.
Prior to the Clinton Bernard case, the Court of Appeal had held that a police officer is on duty when a particular occasion or circumstance warrants his performing the duties of his office, even when the prescribed hours of his duties have come to an end.
