We have already noted that the Explanatory Memorandum of a bill gives reasons for the introduction of a new bill. The Explanatory Memorandum for the Integrity Commission Act 1997 is hereunder.

“1. This Bill seeks to achieve a high level of integrity among persons in public life and seeks to replace the Integrity Commission Act 1991 (No. 21 of 1991) enacted by the previous Parliament, but never enforced. Persons in public life, under the bill, are those holding any of the offices listed in Schedule 1.

“2. Part II of the Bill seeks to establish an Integrity Commission and to make provisions in respect of related maters like terms and conditions of appointment of members, funds, etc.

“3. Part III of the Bill seeks to make provisions relating to disclosure of assets, liabilities and annual income of persons in public life. Persons in public life, who are not members of the Integrity Commission, are required by the Bill to submit annual declarations in regard to the above matters of the Integrity Commission and members of the Integrity Commission are required by the Bill to make similar declaration to the President. Clause 22 of the Bill seeks to prescribe penalties for failing to submit the declaration, submitting an incomplete declaration or submitting a declaration which is false in any material particular, etc.

“4. Part IV of the Bill seeks to establish a Code of Conduct which every person in public life is required to comply with. The Code of Conduct is set out in Schedule II. This Part also seeks to lay down procedures for making a complaint to the Integrity Commission when a person in public life commits a breach of the Code of Conduct and to prescribe the penalty for breach of Code of Conduct.

“5. Part V of the Bill seeks to make provisions in regard to gifts on behalf of the State and personal gifts received by persons in public life.

“6.Clause 42 in part VIII of the Bill creates a new offence. The basic element of this new offence is possession of property or pecuniary resource disproportionate to the known sources of income of a person in public life. The penalties sought to be prescribed for this offence are fine and imprisonment for a term of not less than six months or more than three years.

“7. Clause 43 of the Bill seeks to make clarificatory amendments in section 2 and 11 of the Evidence Act. Cap. 5:03 and clause 44 of the Bill seeks to make a consequential amendment in section 332 of the Criminal Law (Offences) Act, Cap 8:01.

“8. The Integrity Commission Act 1991 (No. 21 of 1991) is sought to be repealed by clause 41 of the Bill.”

On reading the Explana-tory Memorandum some questions come to mind. Are the assets acquired by a person in public life prior to his becoming a public officer, excluded?

What provision is made for secrecy?

Is there really a need for an Integrity Commission Act? We already have Income Tax and Property Tax Acts. Can these not give the information required?

In any case, we already know when illegal acts are preformed with the consent of authorities. For instance, there is a rum shop at Industry being operated on a road parapet. The patrons purchase the rum in a small building and then sit at tables on the parapet. There is no urinal and neighbours’ fences are used. The police have been alerted but the rum show remains on the road.

The Integrity Commission Bill 1995 was debated in Parliament on March 14, 1996 and was sent to a Select Committee of the House where it was amended. It was then passed with the consent of all members.