Who cares about industrial security in this country?

Industrial security includes prevention, detection, and investigation. There is no facility to train and specialise staff in these sectors as most persons involved in industrial security believe that they are there to perform the job of gatekeepers, watchers and perhaps as status symbols like creating personnel bodyguards like thugs in uniform 

By Felix Nihal De Alwis 

Industrial security, commonly known as ‘private security’, originated in Sri Lanka in 1957 with the setting up of MIS security by two respected gentlemen namely Newton Dassanayaka and Uduman, who attempted to join the Ceylon Police as Probationary Sub-Inspectors when they were eliminated by the Director Training at the Time Late Sydney Soysa due to not sending their applications by post, but opted to personally hand over with a letter from their mentor Late Superintendent of Police Seneviratne.

It was in 1992 that the Government decided to regulate the private security by enacting the Act called Regulations of Private Security Act No. 45 of 1998. The Act made provision for the competent authority to publish a security manual. Those involved in the creation were many respected retired senior officers of the Police and Armed Forces. It was at this stage that I had published the first security manual in Sinhala and English along with a forward from my senior officer Retired Senior Superintendent Late H.B. Disaanayaka when I was the deputy to him at Ceylon Cold Stores. The officers included Late Senior DIG Police A.C. Lawrence who requested a copy of my publication to help them understand the basics in industrial security as they were not aware of the procedures and systems concerning private security and now known as industrial security.

Despite various regulations arising out of the Regulations for Private Security Act 45 of 1998 still we have illegal security companies not registered with the Defence Ministry and they are about 350 companies or may be more working to satisfy many clients at the cheapest rates contravening the Act of 1998. Several squads were I am aware instituted to detect them, but it is of no avail. Perhaps the Government must be more positive in its approach by enacting laws to compel a jail sentence to those clients and the illegal companies for operating in this manner ignoring Government regulations.

The whole purpose of enacting law is lost if they are not enforced as in many cases in this country. The governments in the past also required that the private security companies should wear only a particular colour whilst special treatment was given to a company which was managed by the Government, the excuse being that private security should not resemble the Police and the Armed Services. 

It is quite understandable, but why an exception? Surely there are other ways of implementing by advising the companies to avoid imitating the colour and style as all security companies need to market their product being, ‘their security staff’ in a manner to attract their customers (for e.g. one cannot expect the producers of all aerated water to have one particular bottle and label? Is it practical?)

Attitude of Govt. must change

Attitude of the Government must change if industrial security is to develop and progress. Its attitude must change in terms of:

(1) Standard of Recruitment – At present there are Ex Armed forces personnel who have only passed the fifth standard as they were recruited for a purpose during the war, they can hardly read and write. Those who have studied up to (O) Level should be the minimum with experience of at least 10 years or with GCE (O) Level if we are to expect a better professional standards whilst the supervisory staff should possess the GCE (O) Level with at least 10 years’ experience and management A levels or those who have been either an S.I Police or Sub Lt. in the Armed Services. 

The Government has been of the view that to register a security company the manager operations, etc. should at least be a commissioned officer of the Armed Forces or a senior gazetted officer of the rank of an Assistant Superintendent of Police and above, whilst Senior Inspectors of Police with over 15 years of service in the police are more qualified in terms of the law and orders court procedures investigations of a criminal nature and command more knowledge in disciplinary matters management, personnel management and even public relations. It is not practical in the sense that even the present competent authority if a non-commissioned officer but is a graduate and academically proficient cannot set up a company unless he is qualified as stated in the Act.

(2) Wage structure must be upgraded. The industrial security personnel must be brought under the Defence Ministry as it is particularly an integral part of defence. These personnel should be entitled to a pension and brought in commensurate with the police when payment is concerned. As in the case of Singapore security even at the port are brought under the police with powers of arrest e.g. Singapore Airport Terminal Security Systems (SATS). They should not work for more than nine hours most.

(3) Concept of training is a very important aspect. They must be trained to prevent crime and not to be a fighting force. At present training courses are being conducted to train the lower grade staff in military style which is not the purpose of industrial security. Industrial security training must be created to accommodate various aspects of industrial security as industrial security was not created to combat violence as in such situations the police and armed services are equipped. 

Industrial security includes prevention, detection, and investigation. There is no facility to train and specialise staff in these sectors as most persons involved in industrial security believe that they are there to perform the job of gatekeepers, watchers and perhaps as status symbols like creating personnel bodyguards like thugs in uniform! This is the concept accepted even by the private and public industry! If one analyses the important role it can play in the private sector and the public sector then certainly, it is an excellent sign of progress. 

Perhaps not many understand that industrial security can play a vital role in assisting the Government and its agencies like the police, intelligence, ports customs, immigration crime as a whole and preventing terrorism of all sorts, computer frauds, cyber security, security audits, forensic audits, etc. But is the Government and the industrial security geared for it? Certainly not! 

It is with this in view Industrial Security Foundation (ISF) was formed in 1992 and incorporated by Act No. 51 of 1999 with the help of our present State Minister (my schoolmate and police colleague Chamal Rajapaka). The first president was the much respected Fulbright scholar Senior DIG Edward Gunawardana. The ISF did much to upgrade the professional standard of industrial security with many management seminars conducted in prestigious hotels, BMICH and the BIA with participants from international countries and speakers from international airlines, IATA, Scotland Yard and the international renowned universities in Australia. It is relevant to place on record many professionals who chaired these seminars and workshops and exhibitions like for example, Mahinda Rajapaksa (Present Prime Minister), Chamal Rajapaksa, Prof. G.l. Peiris, Former Minister of Labour H. Seneviratne, etc. The ISF made a valiant effort to get the Kotalawala Defence Academy to conduct a Diploma in Industrial Security with a delegation led by Edward Gunawardana but we failed. Time is ripe for the Government now to step in with the ISF to enhance the educational and professional standards in industrial security without further delay. The Act must be revised to change the objectives of industrial security.

It is my fervent hope that the present President Gotabaya Rajapaksa who has much experience in terrorism will certainly take appropriate steps to enhance the professional standards of industrial security without further delay. I wish him well, with his brother who had experience in the private sector will I am sure give him the required support with the ISF in achieving these objectives.

(The writer is a Graduate of the Institute of International Security UK), Fellow of the Industrial Security Foundation of Sri Lanka (FISF), member of the Chartered Institute of Personnel Management, former president of the ISF, and Security Manager KLM Royal Dutch Airlines (1985-1997). Note: Industrial Security Foundation of Sri Lanka incorporated by Act No: 51 of 1999 is the only professional institution in industrial security in Sri Lanka.)