Dear Editor,
I refer to Mr Christopher Ram’s ‘Integrity Commission on shaky ground’ in Sunday Stabroek of February 1, 2009. The commission is within the throes of institution building. The Integrity Commission exists with a functioning secretariat. And the commission can have statutory meetings with or without a chairperson, for in the absence of a chairperson the members may elect a chairperson from among themselves, given the presence of a quorum.
And it seems to me that the President’s intent in publicizing the need for MPs as well as other relevant personnel to comply with the Integrity Commission Act 1997, was a calculation to bring into the fold greater compliance with the integrity law, especially since MPs are the lawmakers of this land.
But instead of seeing the bigger picture pertaining to compliance with the law by any personnel in violation, we saw the usual political wrangling taking centre stage. The focus was on some kind of 2-week ultimatum rather than the need to marshall forces to reach 100 per cent compliance. This usual bickering is not new, same old same − does the President have the right to sound the alarm bell on noncompliance? Were the present commissioners legally appointed? Would the declarations reach the wrong hands?
Should the President sound the alarm bell on non-compliance on any matter, not just this ‘integrity’ thing? You bet! This President or any President within the current legal framework can sound the alarm bell on the need for compliance with the integrity law. As Mr Ram explained, the President under the law annually will receive information on the commission’s activities; and so, through this provision, the President can sound the alarm bell, as the situation and circumstances warrant.
And, it looks like the election campaign for 2011 kicked off a few weeks ago, with Mr Ram struggling to gain possession and hustling to step up his grounding at all points on the field. I wish Mr Ram the best for the next national election in Guyana in 2011. I really mean this!
Look, timely submissions of reports should not be an issue; the political culture that preceded 1992 did not know that annual reports existed for, say, audit, or anything else.
And for all intents and purposes, a 9 to10-year period into the formation and consolidation of a new institution really is a relatively short time to make definitive conclusions on its efficacy. And so, to present ‘reports’ as a marauding ploy at this time is inappropriate, unhealthy, and unkind when we should be addressing the issue of ‘institution building’ for the Integrity Commission.
But regardless of where the commission is with respect to institution-building, the relevant personnel must comply with the law, as there is a functioning secretariat and the commission exists! And then there is the Leader of the Parliamentary Opposition Mr Robert Corbin signalling that the PNCR will not comply with the law governing the commission; his reason is that he is awaiting the judgment of the High Court on the legality of appointments to the Integrity Commission.
As I previously remarked, Mr Corbin’s attempt to hide within the parameters of the High Court’s judgment does not forestall the functioning of the Integrity Commission; the work of this body goes on!
Mr Corbin can run but cannot hide for long behind his court action. This logic suggests that if all institutions are bogged down in court hearings and pending court judgments, then these institutions will cease functioning; the government will close off business, and the entire country will shut down. His argument is ludicrous!
Awaiting the High Court’s judgment does not imply that the current appointments are illegal, and therefore, the Integrity Commission will continue to function; I am unaware of any court action that has deemed the commission to be illegal and that it should stop functioning. This being the case, all declarations from all relevant public officials have to be consummated in a timely manner. And so, I am glad that Mr Ram believes that my point is valid in this context, in that all relevant parties have to comply with the law. There is, too, as aforementioned, a current functioning secretariat.
And Mr Ram should know that my last letter on this subject matter called for all relevant parties to comply with the law in word and deed. I addressed the opposition forces, too, at that time because they were the only people who raised objections. Oops, Mr Ram, too, is raising concerns!
Yours faithfully,
Prem Misir
