The local police in Santa Cruz have not engaged in mandatory firearms training for over six months due to a “shortage of instructors.” The CSIF union highlighted this issue yesterday, bringing attention to the plight of sixty officers that has arisen from “the negligence of the Human Resources and Security divisions within the council, which have failed to manage the recruitment of the police shooting instructor roles listed in the Municipal Job Register (RPT) for the past two years.”
“We are the only police force that is not participating in shooting drills. Other municipalities have agreements with the National Police, Civil Guard or Regional Police, but Santa Cruz is left without support as we are expected to maintain our own facility and staff. This is not currently the case since the recruitment for these roles has yet to be announced,” explained the union representative, Jesús Illada.
Council sources confirmed that the instructor roles for firearms training remain vacant following the expiration of the service commission period. “Human Resources has been asked to permit the announcement and guidelines for the permanent filling of three police shooting instructor positions via a specific competition. However, the Local Police Headquarters is exploring urgent and temporary measures to ensure the training of the force’s personnel, alongside the management of weapons,” they stated. The union elaborated that, “since the creation of the shooting instructor positions, they have been temporarily filled by three officer instructors, who have conducted shooting practice for armed personnel, and have also confiscated weapons from officers when the safety conditions outlined in the regional decree have not been observed. They have even registered compressed air and airsoft weapons belonging to individuals.”
Nevertheless, the CSIF claims that “as of last November 7, the service commission has reached the end of its two-year term and, since that moment, the positions have remained unfilled, which need to be permanently assigned through a specific competition, in accordance with the law and the rulings previously won by the union concerning the unlawful practices that previously occupied the Unipol roles.”
“At this moment,” he insists, “there is no local police officer available to collect weapons if an agent is absent for over four months, nor is there anyone tasked with equipping citizens. These scenarios pose risks for both armed officers and for citizens who lack the necessary training to handle firearms.”
For this reason, Illada declares that “if this situation does not change, more than half of the officer personnel will be unable to utilise weapons legally, a predicament that has already been communicated to those in charge for prompt rectification.”
