Editorial | Recuse MPs from posts

Prime Minister Andrew Holness and the opposition leader, Mark Golding, must urgently elicit from each of their members of parliament (MPs) if he or she has been advised of being the subject of an investigation by the Integrity Commission (IC) for illicit enrichment.

Anyone who answers in the affirmative should be quietly told to take a leave of absence from any Cabinet or Shadow Cabinet portfolio position they occupy; any parliamentary committee of which they are members; and from any office they hold in their respective political parties.

Anyone who declines should – in keeping with the norms of good governance and the idea of justice not only done, but manifestly seen to be done – be summarily suspended from those offices, until the investigations are completed.

This action should be seen as part of restoring to Jamaicans – over seven in 10 of whom believe they live in a very corrupt country – reasons for trusting Government and the institutions of the State, notwithstanding the IC’s disclosure that it has formally told six legislators that they are subjects of corruption investigations. Those members need no longer speculate about the matter.

The fact that the Integrity Commission is investigating the legislators for illicit enrichment/corruption, under sections 14 and 15 of Jamaica’s Corruption Prevention Act, was initially disclosed in the IC’s annual report, tabled in Parliament last month. In addition to the MPs, 28 public officials were reported to be also under investigation.

But because of the controversial gag clause in the law, Section 53 (3) of the Integrity Commission Act, those persons cannot be named, or otherwise identified by the IC until it completes its probes and submits its reports to Parliament. That could be months – or years.

THE LAW IS CLEAR

However, it emerged last week that subsequent to a July 25 meeting of Parliament’s oversight committee for the IC – at which the question was asked – the commission had informed the committee’s members via email that all the MPs who are being investigated have been told.

“All declarants who are being investigated for illicit enrichment must be so advised,” the commission’s director of investigation, Kevon Stephenson, said in the email. “Declarants under such an investigation, must, by law, be given an opportunity to explain how they came by their assets.”

Each year, the 63 members of Jamaica’s House of Representatives and the 21 senators, as well as thousands of other public officials, must file income, assets and liability statements with the IC.

It is not clear for what period the claims against the legislators obtain (in the 2021-22 report one parliamentarian and three public officials were tagged as being under investigation for illicit enrichment), or which chamber of Parliament the suspects sit. The report does not identify whether they are members of the House or the Senate.

Neither is it known what are the specific claims being investigated in relation to the Corruption Prevention Act.

However, Section 14 (1) (b) of the law makes it clear that a public servant also commits an act of corruption if “in the performance of his public functions does any act or omits to do any act for the purpose of obtaining any illicit benefit for himself or any other person”.

Further, a public servant who owns assets disproportionate to his known lawful earnings, and cannot show how he came by the wealth, “shall be liable to prosecution for the offence of illicit enrichment”. That person, if convicted in a parish court on a first offence, can be fined up to J$1 million and jailed for as long as two years, or both. Conviction in a circuit court could bring a fine of up to J$5 million and jail time of up to five years.

SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS

While these matters are only at the investigative stages, they clearly represent serious allegations against high officials in positions of public trust. It is highly unlikely, near impossible, that the IC’s director of information and complaints, who undertakes the first assessment, and the director of investigation, who leads the probe, would take these actions in the absence of information that meets a credible prima facie test.

It is not impossible that a legislator(s) being probed by the IC for illicit enrichment or other forms of corruption sits on the parliamentary oversight committee for the commission, or is a member of the joint select committee reviewing the Integrity Commission Act. That member(s) would therefore have a motivation or an incentive to propose action, or pursue initiatives, to neuter, or otherwise undermine, the commission.

The same principle applies to members of the Cabinet, the Shadow Cabinet and holders of other offices in Government, the legislature or in political parties, where they might subtly or otherwise influence policies, to the detriment of good governance and the fight against corruption.

Taking the action we propose will not be easy for Prime Minister Holness and Leader of the Opposition Golding. But good leaders are at their best when the circumstances are tough.