Special Operations Bill rewrites ZOSO

Akash Sama­roo

Lead Ed­i­tor–Pol­i­tics

akash.sama­[email protected]

The Gov­ern­ment has sig­nif­i­cant­ly rewrit­ten its con­tro­ver­sial Zones of Spe­cial Op­er­a­tions (ZOSO) leg­is­la­tion, re­plac­ing it with the Spe­cial Op­er­a­tions Bill, 2026.

The new bill, which will be de­bat­ed to­day, changes who can de­clare se­cu­ri­ty ar­eas and cur­fews, re­struc­tures po­lice and mil­i­tary op­er­a­tions and in­tro­duces new safe­guards. It al­so re­moves the con­sti­tu­tion­al over­ride con­tained in the pre­vi­ous leg­is­la­tion. Here are 15 of some of the biggest changes:

The new leg­is­la­tion con­tains a sun­set clause. Once brought in­to force, the en­tire act will re­main in ef­fect for two years. The pre­vi­ous bill had no equiv­a­lent ex­piry pro­vi­sion.

The ZOSO struc­ture has been re­placed. In­stead, the new bill di­vides Trinidad and To­ba­go in­to sev­en polic­ing dis­tricts cov­er­ing the en­tire coun­try:

Dis­trict 1: Port-of-Spain, Diego Mar­tin and San Juan-Laven­tille; Dis­trict 2: Ari­ma and Tu­na­puna-Pi­ar­co; Dis­trict 3: San­gre Grande and Ma­yaro-Rio Claro; Dis­trict 4: Ch­agua­nas and Cou­va-Tabaquite-Tal­paro; Dis­trict 5: San Fer­nan­do and Princes Town; Dis­trict 6: Point Fortin, Siparia and Pe­nal-Debe; and Dis­trict 7: the en­tire is­land of To­ba­go.

These form the ge­o­graph­i­cal frame­work with­in which spe­cial op­er­a­tions can take place. A spe­cif­ic area with­in one of these dis­tricts can sub­se­quent­ly be de­clared a “closed area,” where the bill’s en­hanced se­cu­ri­ty mea­sures can ap­ply.

Each of the sev­en polic­ing dis­tricts will have a Head of Spe­cial Op­er­a­tions, ap­point­ed by the Po­lice Com­mis­sion­er and hold­ing at least the rank of su­per­in­ten­dent. That of­fi­cer will be re­spon­si­ble for and in charge of spe­cial op­er­a­tions with­in the dis­trict. The De­fence Force will have a sep­a­rate Head of Mil­i­tary As­sis­tance, of at least the rank of ma­jor, but mil­i­tary as­sis­tance can on­ly be pro­vid­ed where the Po­lice Com­mis­sion­er con­sid­ers it nec­es­sary and re­quests it.

The pre­vi­ous ZOSO mod­el re­lied on a joint com­mand in­volv­ing se­nior po­lice and mil­i­tary of­fi­cers. The new sys­tem is po­lice-led. De­fence Force as­sis­tance is pro­vid­ed where the Com­mis­sion­er con­sid­ers it nec­es­sary and re­quests it.

Pre­vi­ous­ly, the Prime Min­is­ter, in coun­cil, could de­clare a ZOSO. Un­der the new bill, that pow­er rests with the Pres­i­dent. But an area can­not sim­ply be de­clared closed with­out spec­i­fied grounds. The Pres­i­dent must be sat­is­fied on rea­son­able grounds that pub­lic safe­ty and peace are threat­ened by es­ca­lat­ing vi­o­lent crime, homi­cides, shoot­ings, kid­nap­pings or gang ac­tiv­i­ty; il­le­gal firearms, am­mu­ni­tion, weapons or ex­plo­sives; or gang con­trol or in­tim­i­da­tion of a com­mu­ni­ty.

The Pres­i­dent must al­so be sat­is­fied that or­di­nary law-en­force­ment mea­sures are in­suf­fi­cient to main­tain or re­store pub­lic safe­ty and peace. Once an area is de­clared closed, en­hanced se­cu­ri­ty mea­sures can ap­ply there, in­clud­ing re­stric­tions on en­ter­ing or leav­ing with­out a per­mit, cor­dons, cur­fews, war­rant­less search­es and spe­cial ar­rest and de­ten­tion pow­ers.

The pre­vi­ous bill al­lowed a ZOSO to ini­tial­ly re­main in ef­fect for up to 180 days. The new bill con­tains no equiv­a­lent max­i­mum pe­ri­od for a closed-area de­c­la­ra­tion.

Pre­vi­ous­ly, the Po­lice Com­mis­sion­er and Chief of De­fence Staff could im­pose a cur­few with­in a ZOSO. The new bill gives that pow­er to the Pres­i­dent, by or­der sub­ject to neg­a­tive res­o­lu­tion of the House.

The for­mer bill ex­press­ly lim­it­ed a cur­few to 72 hours. The re­vised leg­is­la­tion con­tains no equiv­a­lent max­i­mum du­ra­tion for a cur­few.

Peo­ple gen­er­al­ly can­not en­ter or leave a closed area with­out a per­mit, al­though spec­i­fied pub­lic of­fi­cials and on-du­ty po­lice and mil­i­tary per­son­nel are ex­empt. Breach­ing the per­mit rules can at­tract a $50,000 fine and one year in prison.

With­in a closed area, po­lice can search a per­son, ve­hi­cle or place with­out a war­rant where there is rea­son­able sus­pi­cion that an of­fence is be­ing, has been or is about to be com­mit­ted.

The bill in­tro­duces sev­er­al stages of ju­di­cial over­sight for peo­ple de­tained dur­ing spe­cial op­er­a­tions. A de­tainee must be tak­en be­fore a mag­is­trate, who can au­tho­rise de­ten­tion for up to 48 hours. If a per­son has al­ready been in cus­tody for 36 hours and no such or­der has been made, the of­fi­cer in charge must alert an of­fi­cer of at least as­sis­tant su­per­in­ten­dent rank, who must in­ves­ti­gate the cir­cum­stances and have the de­tainee brought im­me­di­ate­ly be­fore a mag­is­trate.

Where a mag­is­trate au­tho­ris­es the 48-hour de­ten­tion, the per­son must then be tak­en be­fore a High Court judge, who can or­der fur­ther de­ten­tion for a spec­i­fied pe­ri­od with­out crim­i­nal charges if sat­is­fied it is rea­son­ably re­quired in the in­ter­ests of jus­tice. Sig­nif­i­cant­ly, the bill does not spec­i­fy a max­i­mum pe­ri­od for this fur­ther de­ten­tion.

Al­though Prime Min­is­ter Kam­la Per­sad-Bisses­sar said of­fi­cers “must” use body cam­eras, the bill qual­i­fies that re­quire­ment. Of­fi­cers shall use them “as far as is pos­si­ble hav­ing re­gard to avail­able re­sources.” The bill, how­ev­er, pro­vides for pro­to­cols gov­ern­ing who may ac­cess record­ings and specif­i­cal­ly iden­ti­fies over­sight and in­ves­tiga­tive agen­cies that shall have ac­cess for their re­spec­tive func­tions, in­clud­ing the PCA, Po­lice Ser­vice Com­mis­sion, DPP and Om­buds­man.

The new bill in­tro­duces an ad­di­tion­al lay­er of par­lia­men­tary ac­count­abil­i­ty. Heads of Spe­cial Op­er­a­tions and Mil­i­tary As­sis­tance must sub­mit month­ly re­ports on op­er­a­tions, which are ul­ti­mate­ly for­ward­ed to the Prime Min­is­ter and rel­e­vant min­is­ters. The Prime Min­is­ter must then en­sure an an­nu­al re­port on spe­cial op­er­a­tions and mil­i­tary as­sis­tance is laid in Par­lia­ment with­in three months of the end of each cal­en­dar year.

The pre­vi­ous ZOSO Bill paired its se­cu­ri­ty mea­sures with a sig­nif­i­cant so­cial trans­for­ma­tion com­po­nent, re­quir­ing a So­cial Trans­for­ma­tion Com­mit­tee to as­sess con­di­tions in des­ig­nat­ed com­mu­ni­ties and de­vel­op in­ter­ven­tions in­volv­ing ar­eas such as hous­ing, health, ed­u­ca­tion, in­fra­struc­ture and eco­nom­ic de­vel­op­ment. The new Spe­cial Op­er­a­tions Bill con­tains no equiv­a­lent com­mit­tee or de­tailed so­cial trans­for­ma­tion pro­gramme.

The pre­vi­ous bill ex­press­ly in­voked sec­tion 13 of the Con­sti­tu­tion and said it could op­er­ate notwith­stand­ing fun­da­men­tal rights pro­tect­ed by sec­tions 4 and 5, trig­ger­ing the re­quire­ment for a three-fifths ma­jor­i­ty. That pro­vi­sion has been re­moved from the new bill, which the Gov­ern­ment says can now be passed by a sim­ple ma­jor­i­ty.

The Prime Min­is­ter and At­tor­ney Gen­er­al were yes­ter­day asked what changes were made to change the bill to make it re­quire on­ly a sim­ple ma­jor­i­ty for pas­sage. How­ev­er, they both said all will be dis­closed to­day. The Prime Min­is­ter added that the bill will pass and “life will go on.”