Integrity a la Manning

The Integrity Commission (IC) is back in the news again for all the wrong reasons: PM Manning’s allegations that he had special branch officers monitoring the movements of Kamla Persad-Bissessar, because she had a relationship with a member of the IC that was somehow wrong;

• The failure of two government ministers (Karen Nunez-Tesheira and Donna Cox) to file their declarations and statements with the IC with no action taken;
• Dr Roodal Moonilal’s claim that Snr Supt Wellington Virgil greeted a visiting team from the Opposition and stalled its efforts to inspect the Register of Interests (which, by law, must be available to all citizens);
• Dr Tim Gopeesingh’s complaint over Trinre’s growth, allegedly because of political connections via Jerry Narace; and, of course,
• Dr Keith Rowley’s timely reminder that the IC allowed itself to be used by Manning as a weapon of destruction in his personal vendetta against him.

So what are the facts?

Minister Nunez-Tesheira put up a spirited defence. In winding up the debate, she said:

"When I was on the Tidco board, they hadn’t done the prescribed forms; they didn’t require you to at that time. You couldn’t file, because they didn’t have a form.

When I became the Minister of Finance, I got a letter from the Integrity Commission informing me that for the years I was on the Tidco board I had to file, and that’s what I did. That’s why all the filing happened this year."

Apparently, the minister was on the Tidco board from 2003-2007.

No secret

The Integrity in Public Life Act 2000 requires people in public life to simultaneously file two documents by May 31, in each succeeding year: a declaration of income assets and liabilities and a statement of registrable interests.

The Integrity Commission can extend the time for filing for up to six months “for good cause.” The declaration remains secret and cannot be seen by any member of the public.

The statement of registrable interest is not a secret document. The IC, through its registrar, is under a duty to compile a “Register of Interests,” which contains the information on each person’s statement.

This register is available for public inspection at the IC. Once a public official fails to file in the prescribed time, the IC must publish his or her name in the Gazette and a daily newspaper. Thereafter, the commission should make an application to the High Court for an order against the person, to compel them to file by a particular date.

Non-compliance with this court order is an offence, and the official is liable to a fine of $150,000.

Unfortunately, the minister misled the House. The relevant forms were available since December 12, 2003. They were published as part of the regulations made by the IC in Legal Notice No 216, which was gazetted. She was, therefore, obliged to file her declarations and statements since 2004, and should have done so.

In the case of Basdeo Panday v The Integrity Commission, Justice Rajnauth Lee made the following pronouncement:

“The obligation to file for the year 2003 is a ‘continuing’ obligation, pursuant to sections 11 (1) and 11 (4) of the Act. The obligation crystallised on December 12, 2003. The person in public life was, therefore, able to comply with the obligation to file his/her declaration for the year 2003 by the August 15, 2004, or the extended time of November 30, 2004.”

Minister Karen Nunez-Tesheira may be correct to refer Kamla Persad-Bissessar to the IC for the answers she seeks. The burning issue must be the question of political bias.

Why was the IC writing Ms Nunez-Tesheira in September, 2008, to politely remind her that declarations for 2003-2007 were outstanding? Five years and no action taken by the IC? This is ridiculous, to say the least.

Lost in Wonderland

The only logical inference to be drawn from the inaction is that of incompetence or political bias. One would have thought that the IC would be more careful, in the aftermath of Panday’s and Rowley’s cases.

Panday’s defence lawyers, you may recall, had conducted extensive research by inspecting the register, and were able to identify scores of public officials who had not, over the years, filed the annual statement, as required by law. No action was taken by the IC against these individuals, and Panday claimed that he was being unfairly targeted.

The IC is now notorious for dragging things into the mud. It seldom invoked the enormous powers available to it under the act to conduct penetrating, expeditious and meaningful investigations, and hides behind an artificial veil of secrecy when challenged.

The Ken Julien/UTT investigation has gone under, and the Maha Sabha’s radio licence complaint lost in Wonderland.

Jerry Narace and Calder Hart have nothing to worry about. Trust me, even if they’re charged, they can take heart in the way our justice system works.

Franklin Khan’s case was inexplicably adjourned once again. (No one even bothered to show up from the DPP’s office).

I think that says it all.

By Anand Ramlogan 2008-10-05