Editorial | Supporting oversight 

Bruce Golding cannot be accused of being opposed to Prime Minister Dr Andrew Holness, negative towards his administration or hostile to the governing Jamaica Labour Party (JLP).

Indeed, but for a seven-year hiatus when he led the New Democratic Movement (NDM), Mr Golding has been a lifelong member of the JLP, which he rejoined in 2003 and led from 2005 to 2011, the last four as Jamaica’s prime minister. 

When his government imploded over his handling of the Christopher Coke affair, Mr Golding’s public statements had no small effect in propelling Dr Holness to the leadership of the JLP and the prime ministership of the country.

So when Mr Golding advises Jamaica that “keeping an eye on their government is good and worthwhile”, it cannot, or ought not, to be taken as an assault on, or specifically targeted to, the current administration. It is a general principle that transcends party or administration.

Nonetheless, Mr Golding’s exhortation is not only welcome, but particularly apt for the times  — a period when there have been official actions with the potential to weaken transparency and accountability, and campaigns to erode the credibility of institutions with the mission of oversight.  The bodies that have been on the receiving end of these attacks are not only NGOs, but institutions established by the State specifically to ensure that its servants play by the rules. 

Among the recent examples of official policy that carries potential for lessening oversight and weakening accountability is the law to establish the National Reconstruction and Resilience Authority (NaRRA), the agency that is to lead the reconstruction from Hurricane Melissa which hit Jamaica last October.    

NaRRA will not only have plenty of money at its disposal (an estimated US$5-US$10 billion could pass through it over a decade), but it will have tremendous power concentrated in a few hands — its CEO and the portfolio minister. The CEO will have significant authority to do things, including the management of contracts, while the minister will have the power to override decisions of regulatory agencies to facilitate NaRRA’s projects.

Yet, NaRRA will not have a formal governance board, but an advisory committee, which won’t be in the room when decisions are being taken. 

The concession, in the face of public outcry, of having NaRRA producing half-yearly reports for tabling in Parliament is welcome.  But neither those reports, or ex post facto reviews of decisions, are substitutes for real-time, robust interrogation of the actions of management, no matter the integrity of the person in charge.

The debate over NaRRA is the issue that has recently been in the forefront. It is, however, recalled that human-rights NGOs, as well as a commission of Parliament that has responsibility for investigating abuse by the security forces, have faced ridicule for their questioning of the high levels of fatal shootings of alleged criminals by the police and for insisting of the wearing of body-worn cameras by officers who go on the kinds of operations that produce most of the killings.

Further, the Integrity Commission — an agency that tracks the wealth of legislators and other public officials to determine whether their assets align with legitimate sources of income, as well as investigates allegations of corruption — has faced criticisms from lawmakers for how it does it work and campaigns for a reduction of its powers.

At the same time, upwards of 80 per cent of Jamaicans believe they live in a corrupt country and that island continues to hover on a score of 44 on Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index — a score that places Jamaica among countries with serious corruption challenges.

A majority of Jamaicans also lack confidence in the critical institutions like the legislature, politicians and the police, and a significant minority would welcome a coup if the aim was to tame corruption.

It is against this backdrop that Mr Golding endorsed the Jamaica Accountability Meter Portal, an NGO whose web-based indices track the performances of parliamentarians — and now public bodies. It was at the launch of the latter tracker at which Mr Golding spoke.

Public officials, he said, did not “instinctively” welcome oversight or monitoring, often believing it to be intrusive.

Mr Golding argued that this may not be because public officials, including ministers of government, wish the space to be corrupt.  “...Very often they feel that, ‘Look, I was put here to do a job. Just leave me alone and let me do the job’,” he said.

However, public officials have great powers over the lives and well-being of citizens and access to taxpayers’ resources. Unchecked power is often abused, including the use of public resources for private gain.

Having people of high integrity in a position of trust is a good starting point in limiting the likelihood of abuse. What is better are systems built on transparency, effective oversight and accountability. And as Mr Golding said, an engaged citizenry.