Perspective of the private security and loss control profession

AN INVESTIGATION is a fact-finding process of logically, methodically and lawfully gathering and documenting information for the specific purpose of objectively developing a reasonable conclusion based on the facts learned through this process. This definition is provided by ASIS International Investigation Standard ANSI/ASIS INV. 1-2015 for application by its professional members.

The Institute of Certified Loss Management, an affiliate member of the International Private Security Organisation (IPSO), has adopted the family of standards for application by its members as well. The investigation standard provides guidelines for members as individual practitioners and professional security organisations in conducting investigations.

It provides insight and guidance for general practise including processes and considerations one should contemplate when undertaking investigations.

Professional investigation involves application of various methods and techniques which comply with professional accepted standards. Forensic science lends very useful knowledge to the private security profession and is applied as a method, commonly known as forensic investigation, by investigators in conducting investigations.

The terminology “forensic investigation” took centre stage as a favourite panacea to corporate governance challenges faced by various organisations in Zimbabwe. This followed numerous reported suspected, fraudulent and corrupt transactions involving executives in both public and private institutions.

At the time the public and even critical social, political and business stakeholders were made to believe forensic investigation is indeed a panacea in the provision of lasting solutions to corporate governance and financial malpractices afflicting their business organisations and, especially public enterprises.

Of late talk about forensic investigation seems to have vanished from the arena leaving most of the reported cases unresolved and inconclusive. However, in most instances where corporate governance failures and financial scandals are said to have been uncovered executives were either suspended or put on forced leave, followed by commissioning of the popular forensic investigation.

While much attention and prominence has been inappropriately given to forensic investigation, organisations are further exposed to more technology-based threats, including cyber and physical security, with undoubted potential to further affect their resources and operations.

This article focuses on Private Investigation and Forensic Application from professional security management and loss control perspective. There are many security threats posed by technology on business and society which require solutions but corporate governance failure driven by corruption remains the biggest challenge and threat to Zimbabwe’s economic recovery and survival.

Application of forensic technology in resolving social and financial challenges is not a new phenomenon and also not restricted to security management and crime investigations as other professions apply it in solving problems encountered in their domain of practice.

Talking about forensic investigation without putting in place professional management systems to address corporate security threats falls far too short in securing solutions to release the country from the jaws of corruption and corporate governance failures. The legal provision setting Private Investigations as a regulated field requiring licensing of persons before they undertake the practice sets private security apart from other professions.

In Zimbabwe private investigation as a practice is regulated through the Private Investigations and Security Guards (Control) Act Chapter 27:10. Similar legal instruments exist in other countries. It is therefore critical for security practitioners to appreciate forensic technology and its valuable use in designing security systems, investigation methods and evidence collection.

Focus should also be directed at areas where the terminology of forensic investigation sense may be abused by management or board of directors in an effort to confuse the public whenever they intent to strike on innocent executives whom they later quietly compensate. Professional CSO’s should be allowed independence in their operation in this regard

More often the term “forensic” has been abused through its use as a tool to victimise executives following genuine or malicious suspicion of fraud, corruption, and breakdown of corporate governance systems in organisations.

In Zimbabwe the media, both public and private, whose major role is to inform the public has not been left out in capturing latest press releases on the wave of reported scandals and related commissioning of “forensic audit and forensic investigations”.

It has provided space in its daily publications informing the public of the commitment by organisations to deal with crimes and corruption scandals once and for all using forensic expertise. In all suspected financial and management scandals, corruption and corporate governance failures, boards of different organisations have come out of meetings guns blazing and making the similar pronouncements: “We are commissioning forensic investigation and if possible rope in the police to deal with the crime that has been discovered in this organisation”. Whether the teams were or not eventually commissioned is everyone’s guess but the resolutions seemed to focus on suspending top management with promises of getting to the bottom of the rot.

Use of auditors to carry out forensic investigation has been the primary step to a resolution. Such resolutions, as the public has been made to believe, were or are meant to resolutely fix the wheels that have gone loose followed by fitting of new ones.

Everyone, on seeing newspapers, whether public or private, with headlines reading, “Executive Director for XYZ company suspended: Board commissions forensic audit”, makes sure he gives up his last dollar to grab a copy. To date, some people continue to buy newspapers convinced that one day the promised audit reports will be released revealing skeletons extracted from offices of accused and suspended executives.

Stakeholders in affected organisations, both public and private, are also led to believe in the power of forensic audit or forensic investigations in unearthing fraudulent transactions, corrupt deals and laying bare evidence for prosecution of accused culprits.

Numerous resolutions directing the commissioning of one or more of forensic audit or investigations or both following incidences of, in some cases, mere suspicious incidences easily sail through board meetings seemingly without debate. It appears as though the whole nation’s organisations are under the hands of criminals. This is not correct.

Quoting examples in published stories; NewsDay (12 February 2016, 21-22 June 2016, The Sunday Mail 18 September 2016) NetOne; The Independent (20 November 2015) Civil Aviation Authority of Zimbabwe; The Herald (27 January 2014) Air Zimbabwe; Daily News (20 February 2014) Public Service Medical Aid Society –PSMAS; and The Herald (7 May 2016) Zimbabwe Revenue Authority; Daily News (13 April 2013, 11 April 2016) and The Herald (25 June 2015) Zimbabwe Roads Administration Authority-ZINARA; NewsDay (23 May 2010) City of Harare; Financial Gazette (6 May 2014) Zimbabwe Electricity Supply Authority -ZESA, just to name a few.

Unconfirmed news reports are that these organisations paid out thousands of dollars as fees towards either forensic audit or forensic investigation and yet corresponding press releases, where they have been released, have taken time to be published detailing the outcome of such audit or investigation work and action taken thereof.

One strange observation is that in some of the cases cited, personalities may still be on suspension years after the cases were first publicised yet the suspension was meant to pave way for unhindered forensic audit or investigations which may have since been concluded. In other cases the promised rolling of heads just disappeared into thin air followed by golden handshakes. In silence, the public is questioning the authenticity of these forensic audits or investigations or the expertise possessed by the so called forensic investigators.

Golden handshakes

Expressions obtaining from interviews conducted and published by the media reveal negative public perception on these events. That is, money being spent on forensic audits, call them investigation if you want, is not justified given that in most cases no outcomes have been conclusively reported on or released and no revelations of convictions or otherwise are still expected besides golden handshakes.

Golden handshakes! My foot! What for? In disbelief, ordinary citizens are thoughtfully reflecting and keep on guessing for answers, as they fail to access their pitiful salaries. What could be going on behind the scenes in our organisations? Is it that no one knows? Certainly not someone, receiving a golden handshake after being accused of corruption, mismanagement and scandalous conduct! The public continue to ask with amazement.

If forensic investigations were concluded and published transparently no one will come to this far with unanswered questions. If the outcomes are not for public consumption then, equally, detection of the suspicious transactions and decisions to engage forensic experts were not supposed to be availed for public consumption and no press releases should have been made in the first place.

Is it then a question of these organisations washing dirty linen in public? Why giving publicity to board resolutions and commissioning of forensic expert engagements if, after all, outcomes thereof are never to see day light? The public cannot be blamed for suspecting these forensic expert engagements could be the work of syndicates who are out to siphon funds from organisations they are supposed to protect.

This may not be ruled out in an environment where a network of few persons have been reported to be each sitting on boards of more or less all critical institutions in the country and in some instances one person sitting on the boards of more than eight companies. If transparency prevails, certainly everyone could expect outcomes from such audits or investigations so far commissioned and recovery of alleged prejudices coupled with conviction of offenders having taken place.

In the public opinion, with no press release revealing any conclusive outcomes, it seems none of the cases has been transparently resolved. To the ordinary inquisitive citizens, obviously, the following questions therefore remain unanswered and continue to occupy their thoughts as they ponder on where to get the next meal.

This should also be of concern to security professionals; ◆ Are forensic investigations so far done revealing, or are they not just coated financial audits? Who recommends the need for forensic investigation and are security professionals involved at any one point in these exercises? Is the engagement of forensic investigation expertise necessary and if so is it relevant in the circumstances? Are the investigations genuine and justified by real and clear circumstances? Is it forensic audit or forensic investigation that is needed in such circumstances? Are authorities entrusted with oversight responsibilities making the right decisions on behalf of stakeholders and do they appreciate the difference between forensic auditing and investigation? Is this not the same experience as the one in which the public witnessed havoc in the financial sector where depositors’ savings were looted and the responsible institutions were simply declared insolvent and their directors and management handsomely walked away rich; no questions asked? It is now public knowledge that none of the directors and management who are reported to have been behind collapsed financial institutions has been convicted. Instead they are sitting pretty as deprived depositors are wallowing in abject poverty and counting on their losses. People who have been accused of petty crimes have since had prison doors opened for them while those accused of large-scale financial fraud and corruption crimes seem to enjoy crime indemnity or have earned immunity to prosecution.

Is it that, perhaps, the wrong expertise is being employed to conduct investigations or auditors are raising unnecessary alarm? The public is witnessing undeservedly golden handshakes being turned into retirement schemes; again this being a scandal on its own.

In the case of financial sector scandals some beneficiaries from the schemes were subsequently appointed to boards of institutions of strategic importance to the nation. One wonders what they are being recognised for. Learning from the past the public can no longer expect to read any press release of reports on the concluded cases except those involving the now famous golden handshakes.

As seen from cases so far published there seem to be expectation of any skeletons to be retrieved after the departure of fingered executives as promised. They never existed anyway. Perhaps where they were or whenever they will be found, they will simply be rapped and thrown away to facilitate golden handshakes. While all this is happening security professionals should work up from their sleep and make society aware, recognise and take pride in professionals whose work the State regulates and protect through legislation.

These professionals are employed to carry out a function called Security Management or Loss Control. Organisations, maybe, where authentic audit reports have revealed anomalies, are employing non-professional investigators who furnish them with unprofessional prepared and sub-standard investigation evidence and reports or are responding to false alarms raised by auditors.

Investigation is part of security management which should be appropriately conducted by security professionals. Professional forensic crime investigation remains a myth to most security/ loss control practitioners hence a professional gap is exposed which other professions, auditors included, come in to exploit at the expense of poor service to society. The recommended way forward for the private security profession is to put its house in order by creating the requisite infrastructure for it to claim its rightful role and recognition.

The first assignment to advocate for a review of the legislation so that, as with other professions, protection mechanisms are put in place to prohibit interference by non-professionals or other professions and unqualified people masquerading as security practitioners or investigators.

The second and critical assignment is to ensure the review provides for the minimum professional training, service standards and code of conduct and setting up of a professional board that ensures compliance. Facts on the ground reveal that the security sector is still a virgin area awaiting exploitation hence it is attracting members from other professions to masquerade as investigators.

Traditional practitioners are showing resistance to change but fail to take sight of the invasion from technology and other professions like electronic engineers and IT. Private Security is now a profession and time for a traditional security practitioner whose space has depended on experience now hang in the balance as the field is now attracting qualified young professionals.

They either have to develop requisite professional skills to remain relevant or face the threat of being flushed out. Nevertheless, it is high time security practitioners put their house in order, build appropriate professional structures and take their rightful places in the family of professions. Retired Lt-Colonel Joshua Murire is an Independent Loss Management Researcher and ICLM Executive Director. Institute of Certified Loss Management, Suite 813, 8th Floor, South Wing, Dolphin House. Cnr. L. Takawira Street/Kwame Nkrumah Avenue. Telephone: 263-4-250557, 250894 Email: info@iclm-int.org Harare. Website: www.iclm-int.org Private Investigation and Forensic Science Application For any comment please contact ICLM information desk on +263 4 781995-870, +263 4 253894 or logon to: ICLM website www.iclmint.org

Traditional practitioners are showing resistance to change but fail to take sight of the invasion from technology and other professions like electronic engineers and IT. Private Security is now a profession and time for a traditional security practitioner whose space has depended on experience now hang in the balance as the field is now attracting qualified young professionals.