THE POST-mortem report on Shadrack Arloo puts paid to the controversy over whether or not the Police killed the young man.
Unless proven wrong, we can only go with the pathologist’s conclusion that the cause of death of the deceased was asphyxiation occasioned by a blocked airway. The substance which blocked the airway, the report went on, was narcotic in nature. With a scientific outcome of a medical probe the subject can as the remains of the deceased be interred.
We are constrained to return to the unfair discourses the incident engendered on the airwaves. With the passion for political subjects burning in them, some discussants attacked the integrity of the Police as though the institution is made up of sadists from another planet who would kill without a thought about the fallouts from such bloodletting action.
If the outcome of the post-mortem does not instill in those who are reckless about how they discuss issues, then we do not know what else would.
The manner in which some subjects are discussed by so-called security experts impacts negatively on the outcome of critical investigations being undertaken.
As we pointed out earlier, when we are dealing with issues with security implications, we must be circumspect in the manner we express ourselves in the name of freedom of expression.
When we exercise such freedoms irresponsibly and erode public confidence in institutions of state, such as law enforcement and administration of justice, the fallouts are anything but in the national interest.
It is gladdening that even when the one-sided discourses prevailed, the law enforcement personnel just minded their business as bestowed upon them by the constitution.
Once more, our commentary is not intended to inflict more pain on the bereaved family but just to straighten out the rough edges about the subject.
The law enforcement personnel who suffered the tongue-lashing of those who love to attack state institutions are as Ghanaian as those who berated them.
Jumping into issues when we lack sufficient details about them presents us as mischievous characters whose intentions are only evil.
The young man should not have swallowed the stuff which has been identified as narcotic in nature.
Much as the post-mortem report has exonerated the police, we are, however, not amused that the law enforcement administration would complain about non-assistance from the persons with vital information on the subject under review.
We are, for , at our wits end as to why management of the company whose CCTV camera captured footage about what transpired within its vicinity is refusing to release same to the police.
What stops the Police from seeking a court order to compel the owners of the CCTV footage to cooperate with them?
It is for good reasons that such orders are issued by courts. Anything that would paint a clearer picture of what happened should be pursued warts and all.
As for the Police, they deserve apologies from the garrulous persons who subjected them to unnecessary berating.