I am a terror suspect in my own organization!
A lot of things in Africa do not make very good sense to me. One of them is unnecessary security checks at some places considered "important." Woe unto you if you do not subject yourself to these, sometimes very annoying, security rituals. But do they really make sense? Does a slight bending of these rules threaten national security?
I work in a big organization that treats security of its members "very seriously." However, I find some of their security practices very ridiculous, annoying and/or irrational. They do not make sense at all. But you should see the zeal, enthusiasm and seriousness with which their custodians enforce them.
The other day I was entering some building of the organization. Its entrance is designed in such a away that strangers and certain employees have to pass through some walk-through metal detector to "detect" if they are carrying an atomic bomb. At such entrances, all your metallic possessions are supposed to pass through x-ray screening system. That day, because the conveyor belt on the machine had not been activated by the lady officer manning the entrance, I decided to put my phone and a bunch of keys over the machine as I passed through the metal detector entrance. The kind of backlash I got was enough to tell me, of course without telling me, that I am a terror suspect in my own organization.
"Hey you!" she was up on her feet fuming like a rattled pregnant snake. "Stuff must go through the machine. Can you go back and put them through the machine!" she said. I did not even look at her. I just smiled, went back and performed the ritual. I put the phone and the keys in a small blue plastic tray, shoved it in the x-ray machine as I went through the metal detector. I smiled till I reached my destination on the 7th floor of the building. Just a mobile phone and a bunch of keys; couldn't she see them really??
The next day I went back to the same building. As usual I had to perform the same boring security ritual. Instead of the stuff being pulled through the x-ray screening system, my lady guard curtly announced, "the machine is not 'doing', put them stuff over it," again I smiled. This time round I looked at her. She did not recognize me. I smiled again and went on my way.
It reminded me of a similar incident in another building where our office is housed. The entrance is manned by the National Youth Service boys and girls. That day I was on a phone call so I decided to bypass that small metal-detector entrance with my cellphone on my ears. The NYS fellows were literally up on my neck.
"Hey! Boss! You must pass through the machine!"
"Honestly, I pass here every single single day and it is not like you guys do not know me. What's wrong with you today?"
It was futile. I had to go back and pass through their machine. Very annoying I say. Ironically, sometimes I pass though this thing with all my metallic stuff in my pockets. The fellows do not do anything. Their machine, as usual, makes funny beeping sounds as I go to the office.
However, not everybody is subjected to this kind of molestation. There are very important people in my organization who are immune from frisking. These ones are too good to be terrorists. They pass through the same entrance without going through the machine. Sometimes they even go through gates designated for vehicles. They can exit through entrances and enter through exits. If you happen to accompany them, you also enjoy immunity from security screening.
Nevertheless, you are not allowed to use the important people's entrance every time everywhere. Picture this: Your immediate boss has trusted you so much that she "carries" you in her car as you go to the organization. However, at the entrance, you are forced to get out of the car and go through the screening machine while she is chauffeured through. It is laughable, isn't it?
What difference does it make anyway? Is it safe to assume that certain people are more "terrorists" than others merely by their job group/status? Is it fair to assume that because one holds a lowly position in an organization such a person is a security threat? Is it proper to imagine that a well-dressed person in very expensive clothes cannot be a security threat? Is it safe to assume that a person driving an expensive and posh car cannot be a criminal?
Kenya for you, isn't it, the big man syndrome is our biggest undoing and unfortunately it's the small man who is harassing another of his small man colleague, no wonder we will never rise up and take this government head on because they've perfected the art of pitting us against each other.
ReplyDeleteThe confusion surrounding our security sector is insane. A lot need improvement in this sector..
ReplyDeleteYeah, but who will champion thé "non-uniform" reforms?
DeleteI thought am the only person who normally see this as awkward. One day I decide to ask one security guard why they normally treat people known to them as suspects. She told me "Ile camera ikinichukua kama nimeachilia mtu bila kucheck nitapoteza unga". My understanding is that they normally do it for formality
ReplyDeleteYeah, I also established that....
DeleteI can remember one time the head of security directed that every driver and occupants of a vehicle should alight the vehicle for vehicle to be checked.
ReplyDeleteOne day I decided to test their efficient , we were two of us and as I was exiting the vehicle I placed a firearm between the driver's chair and the passenger's. After two minutes of checking we were allowed to proceed. You see...
Hébergée....See now
DeleteDouble standards really.
ReplyDeleteUniversalism and partcularism..... 😄😄😄
DeleteI hope you come a cross a unit known as Persuasion and Negotiation in your stay at SPU...I'll share an ebook by author known as Cialdini. Read about the principle of authority then the use of poshy cars, nice clothes and titles will fall into place.
ReplyDeleteI will really appreciate thé book senior
DeleteHow well are they trained by their respective employers on the need to exercise professionalism? Organisational communication is paramount for effective results.
ReplyDelete