Why Maloney? Robinson-Regis Questions Curfew, Citing More Shooting Deaths in Couva Than Maloney
Trincity/Maloney Member of Parliament Camille Robinson-Regis is questioning why the Government selected Maloney for extraordinary security restrictions under the Special Operations Act, 2026, after presenting figures suggesting that Couva recorded more shooting-related deaths over the same period.
Speaking at an Opposition press conference on Wednesday, November 11, Robinson-Regis compared reported shooting deaths in Couva and Maloney between January 1 and November 10, 2026.
According to the figures she presented, Couva recorded nine shooting-related deaths during the period, compared with six in Maloney.
"Why is Maloney the area targeted? Why?" she asked.
The MP argued that residents deserved to know why their community had been selected for a closed-area declaration and curfew when another community reportedly recorded more shooting deaths.
Nine Deaths in Couva, Six in Maloney
Robinson-Regis presented a breakdown of the figures, stating that seven civilians were murdered by firearms in Couva, compared with four in Maloney.
She also cited six civilian shooting murders in Couva and three in Maloney, while reporting one resident from each community shot elsewhere.
Police-involved shooting deaths were recorded as two in each area, according to her presentation.
She placed the total documented shooting deaths at nine in Couva and six in Maloney.
The figures have not been independently verified, and the categories presented may overlap. They should therefore be treated as statistics cited by the Opposition rather than independently established police totals.
Why Was Maloney Selected?
Robinson-Regis questioned the criteria used to determine that Maloney required extraordinary policing measures.
She argued that the Government must explain why conventional law enforcement arrangements were considered insufficient, particularly given the presence of a major police station in the community.
The MP called for a public explanation of the intelligence, legal grounds and operational considerations behind the declaration.
She maintained that national security considerations should not prevent the Government from accounting for the use of extraordinary powers.
Police Say Intelligence Prompted Action
Commissioner of Police Allister Guevarro has defended the Maloney intervention, saying intelligence indicated a situation requiring immediate action.
When questioned about why Maloney had been selected rather than other communities experiencing serious crime, the Commissioner stated that the intelligence suggested something different in Maloney.
He declined to disclose whether the information concerned retaliation or an escalation of violence.
The Commissioner's explanation indicates that the police decision was based on intelligence about a perceived security threat rather than a straightforward comparison of historical shooting deaths.
However, the specific intelligence supporting the decision has not been publicly detailed.
Concerns About Residents' Rights
Robinson-Regis also warned against allowing security operations to stigmatise an entire community.
She described the majority of Maloney residents as law-abiding citizens who deserved both protection from criminal activity and respect for their constitutional rights.
"We have to fight the criminals, but we also have to protect the innocent and we have to respect this constitution," she declared.
The MP appealed to residents to remain calm, cooperate with lawful police instructions and avoid confrontations with officers.
She encouraged anyone who believed their rights had been infringed to document the circumstances and pursue the appropriate complaints procedures.
Questions Remain About the Curfew
Robinson-Regis further questioned what would happen after the curfew ends and whether authorities had developed a sustainable strategy to prevent renewed criminal activity.
She said residents should not have to live indefinitely under restrictions on their movements.
The MP called for clear explanations of the criteria used to select Maloney, the safeguards governing police operations and the measures intended to protect innocent residents.
Her comparison between Couva and Maloney adds another dimension to the public debate surrounding the Special Operations Act.
While police maintain that intelligence justified the intervention, the Opposition is demanding greater transparency about why Maloney was selected.
The central question remains whether the Government can provide sufficient public justification for the extraordinary restrictions without compromising sensitive police intelligence.