IC acted fairly in probe of controversial Charlemont development, Supreme Court rules

The Supreme Court has ruled that the Integrity Commission (IC) acted lawfully and fairly in publishing a report that was critical of how a former official at the National Environment and Planning Agency (NEPA) handled breaches that were identified at a controversial housing development.

The IC is Jamaica’s main anti-corruption body.

The housing development at 11 Charlemont Drive, in St Andrew, was undertaken by Mark Barnett, president of the state-owned National Water Commission who was sent on leave following the release of the report; his wife, Annette, an attorney; and developer Phillip Smith.

The 2023 investigative report by the IC found that instead of the 12 one-bedroom units that were approved by authorities, the development had six two-bedroom units and six three-bedroom units, in breach of permits and approvals issued by both NEPA and the Kingston and St Andrew Municipal Corporation.

Kevon Stephenson, the IC’s Director of Investigations, concluded, in the report that after issuing a warning letter to the developers on February 10, 2021, Morjorn Wallock, former director of the legal and enforcement division at NEPA, “failed to execute any further enforcement measures to ensure compliance with the permits issued in relation to the development”.

“The DI concluded that the foregoing omission on Ms Morjorn Wallock’s part amounts to gross dereliction of duty and significantly contributed to the creation of the environmental/opportunity which facilitated the breaches identified herein,” the report said.

Wallock, through her attorneys Symone Mayhew and Lemar Neale and Aaliyah Myrie, sought judicial review of the adverse findings, arguing that she was never informed during two hearings at the commission that she was a person under investigation and was blindsided by the dereliction of duty accusation.

The former NEPA official asked the Supreme Court to grant an order of certiorari quashing the adverse findings made against her by the IC and a declaration that Stephenson acted ultra vires or outside his legal authority under the Integrity Commission Act.

She also asked the court to compel Stephenson to recommend to the anti-corruption body that she should be “exonerated of culpability” and grant a mandatory injunction compelling the IC to remove all adverse findings and conclusions.

Her attorneys argued that the findings and recommendation made by the IC were “procedurally irregular” because Wallock was not given the opportunity to defend herself against the allegations.

Wallock, an attorney, complained that publication of the report has caused her “reputational harm and embarrassment and distress”.

But Justice Tania Mott Tulloch-Reid, in her judgment, noted that Wallock was given an opportunity to respond to the issues raised by the IC and the role she played or whether she wanted to clarify anything, but declined.

“I do not believe that the commission acted unfairly, unreasonably or irrationally. The evidence suggests that the process was fair and that Miss Wallock was apprised of concerns that the commission had about the role she played in the post permit approval and enforcement processes,” said Tulloch-Reid in the decision handed down on Monday.

The judge said it was her view that the process was fair and did not breach the rule of natural justice.

“I do not find that the adverse findings made against the claimant [Wallock] in the report were unreasonable or irrational. I do not find that the defendant [IC] acted ultra vires [of] the ICA,” she added, making reference to the Integrity Commission Act.

The IC was represented by senior attorney Annaliesa Lindsay.

- Livern Barrett

Follow The Gleaner on X and Instagram @JamaicaGleaner and on Facebook @GleanerJamaica. Send us a message on WhatsApp at 1-876-499-0169 or email us at onlinefeedback@gleanerjm.com or editors@gleanerjm.com.