Quest for integrity

This story starts in the middle, an apt position for it to begin when one considers the twists and turns the narrative contains, that the tale’s introduction is somewhat illusive and that its final chapter is still to be written. It was Tuesday last. Newsday’s parliamentary reporter, Sean Douglas called me to draw my attention to what he said he thought was an error in last Sunday’s column. In appealing to the Prime Minister not to bring a bill to Parliament to weaken the Integrity in Public Life Act, 2000, I had stated that the Act’s complementary declaration forms had not been approved by the legislature. I told Sean that I didn’t like making factual errors and I was grateful to him for pointing this one out. However, I added, I had not made the statement about the forms lightly, but after a day of searching my computer for all the stories I had written on the Act and of pouring over the archives of the three daily newspapers, Hansard (the record of parliamentary debates) and the report of the Joint Select Committee which had deliberated on the Act’s forms. I had found evidence that the forms had been approved by the Senate in November 2003, but could not locate their passage in the Lower House.

I asked Sean if he knew the date the forms had been accepted by the House of Representatives. He did not. This was completely astounding because Sean Douglas has written over 40 articles on the Integrity Act in the past year. He said however, he was pretty sure the forms had been approved and that they had been printed. However, he added, given the secrecy shrouding them, nothing could be taken for granted. We recommenced the search for their Lower House passage. A day later, thanks to the always-helpful parliamentary staff, we located the date the forms had been approved. It was December 5, 2003. I’m not going to mince words by using dog-eared clich?s like “to err is human” or waste your time by being wrong and strong. I made a terrible mistake and for that, I sincerely apologise. However, what I will say is that I am not surprised by the error. The location of the Act’s declaration forms has since 2002 been a great mystery in Trinidad and Tobago, almost as great as the nation’s unsolved kidnappings. Following their trail has become nothing less than a quest for integrity.

Let me now try to start from the uncertain beginning. Towards the end of 2002, I began asking questions about the Integrity Act’s accompanying declaration forms, inadvertently opening a Pandora’s Box that the newly elected PNM Government apparently wanted kept tightly shut. Questions such as why the forms, already laid in Parliament by the UNC administration in 2001, but not approved before its collapse, had not been re-introduced by the new PNM Government. Was this Government going to honour the main campaign promise it had made to the electorate: that it would be honest and transparent in public life? I was asking the questions for two reasons. I felt that by showing a keenness to make declarations of their assets and/or liabilities, our leaders would be demonstrating their word was bond and that they would be sending a strong message to the citizenry that no one, not the highest on high were above the law. This, in my opinion, would help the society’s growth tremendously and assist the fight against crime ten times more than any one of the new-fangled anti-crime initiatives the Government was launching every month, because the refrain of many the “ordinary” man and woman had become, “if politicians and big boys could t’ief, who is me?”

The then Attorney General was Glenda Morean-Phillips and her answers to the questions were often so obscure, if not obtuse that I began to wonder whether this Government did not plan to scuttle the bill. The forms this,  the forms that, she rambled; the Government was looking at other anti-corruption measures (remember a Mr de Speyville?). My head was being spun in ten wrong directions by an administration which was voted into office because it had promised to fight corruption and to be honest and accountable. I decided to find out what was really going on. What I discovered in mid-2003 made me certain the PNM was reluctant to enforce the Integrity Act. A letter from the former head of the Integrity Commission, retired Justice Gerard des Iles to Prime Minister Patrick Manning in early 2003 urging Manning to have the forms approved by Parliament had more or less been ignored. A curt acknowledgement of receipt of his correspondence from a junior secretary in Whitehall was all des Iles got. I began to think the Government would have to be pushed kicking and screaming to Parliament with the declaration forms.

However, as editor of the daily paper I did not have the time to continue the “Quest for Integrity.” Who would take it on? Sean Douglas was always in the Red House, he was thorough and he had a keen interest in this Act. He inherited the investigation/campaign. I assisted by occasionally reminding Government to do the right thing in my column. Poor Sean, though. He got the more rotten half of an extremely putrid apple. His head began to spin. I truly believe though, that had it not been for his perseverance, the forms never would have received parliamentary approval last year. He had to prod the Government every step of the way. Sean is still fighting the good fight. He has been able to discover that the forms have been printed and the alleged deadline for submissions is the middle of this month, after declarants were given a two and a half month extension of the original May 31, 2004 closing date. The ever-secretive Integrity Commission however, will not tell Sean if anyone has filed their declaration for 2003.

The Act solely precludes the Commission from revealing the content of the declarations or any evidence given it, but the Commission uses these prohibitions as a blanket to wrap everything in secrecy. I can thus tell you without fear of erring, that the declaration forms have been approved by Parliament and printed. I can also tell you the Prime Minister has announced he intends to water down the original legislation. However, beyond that nothing more. Isn’t that not only amazing, but as disturbing as no one except Sean seemingly detecting my error last week? We are not talking about useless legislative measures like a proposed bill to deny bail to alleged kidnappers no one can catch, but the enforcement of a key Act approved by both the PNM and UNC in 2001, an Act which would have an immediate impact on corruption in public life. Yet few appear to know much about it and no one in the know will talk. This Government cannot pretend to truly want to curb crime of any colour collar, not when it is sending out the most inappropriate signals to the populace about the Integrity Act. Please, correct me if I’m wrong. email: suz@itrini.com