The Tribune

SHARP WORDS were exchanged last week at the Nassau Street magistrate's court complex between the police officer in charge of security and a lawyer, himself a former senior police officer, who objected to the new security measures that had been introduced just 10 days before.

It was reported that the lawyer refused to be searched, a new requirement of every person entering the $6.5 million complex that houses 12 courts. The security officer persisted in carrying out his duties. The former assistant superintendent of police, now practising at the Bahamas Bar, resisted. He has threatened to sue.

The court officer insisted that he was being professional in doing his duty. He said his duty was to "make people coming to the court feel safe", and he, as the officer responsible for the new facility, intended to carry out his duties to the fullest.

He quite rightly pointed out that "if someone gets hurt coming into this building because we the police didn't do our jobs properly, then that will be on us".

It is not for us to argue the rights and wrongs of this case. If the offended lawyer pursues his threat to bring assault charges against the court's police officer for possibly exceeding his duty, then the matter will be argued and decided in court.

However, we are rather alarmed at the attitude of lawyers, who obviously believe that they should be treated differently from John Q Public.

A group of lawyers watching the incident, commented to our reporter that they also objected to the search order, calling it "demeaning".

Is this what they tell the airlines when they line up and meekly take off their shoes, their belts, their jackets and empty their pockets of any foreign matter that might alarm the cameras before security clears them for boarding?

Any objections would quickly bring security and the handcuffs, and one less passenger on the line.

One doesn't even dare joke about security at an airport. On one occasion, a passenger sitting in front of us on an aircraft with a box on his knees, joked to the stewardess when she asked him to put the box in the overhead compartment that there was a bomb inside.

Suddenly, that was the end of him. Two uniformed hefties entered the aircraft, grabbed him, and dragged him off. By the alarmed look on his face, we knew it was a joke that would not have a happy ending.

"Everyone who comes into this court, even policemen, they are checked," the court's officer explained to our reporter.

"People are searched at other institutions as well. At the prison, the lawyers are searched. Even the Superintendent of the prison is searched before he is allowed to enter the building.

"It is for the safety of the prisoners and the staff that work there. If the police slack off here and someone gets hurt, who will they jump on?" the security officer asked.

When rules are laid down -- particularly for the security of the public- those rules are meant for everybody. No one is above the law.

And to make it easier to enforce security measures, court officials should be the first to set the example. If they feel demeaned, then what do they think of the little man in the street, who also sees himself as a decent, law-abiding citizen? Shouldn't he also feel demeaned and object?

The court's security officer pointed out that the new security measures were implemented to protect all persons entering the complex.

Last week, lawyer Wayne Munroe in scoffing at government's introduction of electronically linked videos to Fox Hill prison to deal with prisoners on remand so that they don't have to be bused to the Nassau Street court, criticised government's decision to build these courts in the "ghetto" and its failure to protect witnesses.

"You cannot protect a man in court built on the street where anyone can just drive by the steps," said Mr Munroe. "It's ridiculous!"

And inside that court, where government is trying to give protection to all -- including lawyers -- a group of lawyers, instead of setting an example by submitting to the rules, want to be exempt because they find it personally "demeaning!"

We must remember that no one is above the law, and those who administer those laws should be the first to recognise this and lead by example.