Senate President: Parliament will not bow to Opposition threats over FLA report

Senate President Tom Tavares-Finson has declared that the presiding officers of Parliament will not “bow to any intimidation or threat” from Opposition Leader Mark Golding in deciding when to table an Integrity Commission (IC) investigative report into alleged acts of corruption and irregularities at the Firearm Licensing Authority (FLA).

Reading from what appeared to be a prepared text in the Upper House yesterday, Tavares-Finson described as “unprecedented” the threat by the opposition leader to seek a declaration from the courts in relation to the non-tabling of the FLA report which has been held for about seven weeks by the presiding officers.

His remarks were in response to a question from Opposition Senator Lambert Brown who wanted to know if the court had issued an order for Parliament not to table the report.

The president of the Senate said the presiding officers would administer the affairs of the Parliament in accordance with established protocols, the Standing Orders and the Constitution of Jamaica.

On Thursday, Golding wrote to Speaker of the House Juliet Holness, the Senate president and Clerk to the Houses Colleen Lowe advising them that if the FLA report which was submitted to Parliament on March 30 was not tabled at the next sitting of the House and Senate, respectively, he would be instructing his lawyer Michael B. Hylton, King’s Counsel, to file proceedings in the court.

Golding also shared a legal opinion by Hylton with the presiding officers outlining why he believed the FLA report should be tabled as soon as possible.

Tavares-Finson said the Speaker had been unfairly criticised and accused of attempting to “thwart and stifle our democracy and its institutions by her failure to table the report”.

He said Holness has been incorrectly accused of breaching provisions of the Integrity Commission Act (ICA) 2017.

“I wish to make it abundantly clear that the decision not to table the specific report was not taken by the Speaker of the House Juliet Holness in isolation. That decision was taken by the presiding officers – that is to say myself as president of the Senate and the Speaker of the House in consultation with the clerk and the legal officers of the Parliament,” he explained.

According to Tavares-Finson, individuals who are well aware of how the powers of Parliament are exercised blamed the Speaker in what he said was another attempt to besmirch her authority and tarnish her reputation.

“I am not surprised by these attacks, however, as there is a long history of attacking strong women in leadership in this country by many sections of our society,” he noted.

Without delving into the details of the ICA, Tavares-Finson said the legislation does not impose “an obligation on the presiding officers to table reports received within any specific time or indeed at all but rather states that the commission is to submit reports to the Parliament for tabling”.

He stressed that the decision to table or not or when to table rests with the presiding officers of Parliament.

Discussing how the presiding officers came to their position, the Senate president said the Ian Hayles matter was examined. He said in that case involving Hayles and the then Office of the Contractor General (OCG), one of the agencies subsumed into the IC, the court made it clear that the proceedings in the legislature are within the sole purview of the presiding officers of Parliament.

Quoting from the Supreme Court judgment, Tavares-Finson said, “The Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate would have been acting intra vires by tabling the report submitted to it by the OCG. Their actions would be categorised as Parliament conducting their internal affairs and as such their actions would be immune from the jurisdiction of the court.”

He indicated that in the FLA matter now before the court, the agency was seeking to bar disclosure of the report. The Senate president said the view was taken that those proceedings should move ahead until it became clear where the court was heading in the matter. 

“We determined that the document ought not to be tabled until the issue in the court was further ventilated.”

Tavares-Finson said this approach was not new as it was applied in the Hayles’ matter and was reportedly supported by the then leader of the opposition Dr Peter Phillips.

He said the approach that Parliament has adopted has received the approval of the most senior constitutional lawyer, Dr Lloyd Barnett.

However, Tavares-Finson said the position that the presiding officers have taken would be continuously reviewed.

editorial@gleanerjm.com