Justice Minister Delroy Chuck has come under fire from retired Justice Seymour Panton, the chairman of the Integrity Commission (IC), for advising his fellow lawmakers to disregard a crucial clause in the IC Act that requires them to provide the anti-corruption agency with information regarding their spouses’ income.
Chuck’s advice to his colleagues to disobey the law “may well be itself an offense,” Panton stated in a scathing reprimand of the senior government minister and congressman.
“What sort of example is he setting for public officers?” Panton asked, adding that in several nations, such an admission would have resulted in the justice minister being released from his ministerial duties.
The chairman of the IC reminded the nation that the IC Act, which was approved by lawmakers, including the justice minister, calls on lawmakers and public servants to make certain statements. According to him, failing to do so might result in fines or even jail time.
- Advertisement -
“I am very disappointed that he is confirming a view that he is not serious about good governance. After all, it is not difficult to see that it is very easy to hide income and assets in the names of relatives,” Panton stated.
“I urge all parliamentarians and public officers to do the right thing. That is obey the law!” he noted.
Chuck previously sparked controversy when he said the Integrity Commission lacked “integrity.”
The founding main director of National Integrity Action, Professor Trevor Munroe, responded sharply to Chuck’s recent statements, saying: “Unless clarified or wrongly represented, Chuck is advising/inciting MPs to break the law.”
Section 39 of the IC Act noted that “subject to the provisions of this Act, every person who, on or after the appointed day, is a parliamentarian or public official, shall submit to the director of information and complaints, a statutory declaration of his assets and liabilities and his income in the form set out in the Third Schedule.”
Additionally, the IC Act’s Section 40 declares, “a statutory declaration shall include such particulars as are known to the declarant of the income, assets, and liabilities of the spouse and children, where applicable of the declarant”.
Chuck expressed concerns about demands from the IC concerning the wages of some of his coworkers’ wives during a recent meeting of the Integrity Commission Oversight Committee in Gordon House.
He noted, “Why is the Integrity Commission asking members to indicate the salaries of their spouse or sometimes of their children? I don’t know if this is appropriate because I have advised the relevant members, to let them know your spouse is not prepared to divulge their salary.”
Additionally, Chuck proposed that “what limits can be put in terms of investigations” be clarified by the joint select committee examining the IC statute.
All eyes are on government representatives on Parliament’s Joint Select Committee that is examining the IC Act to see what changes will be made to the anti-corruption agency’s legislation after a secret meeting on Thursday that was hosted by outspoken critic Everald Warmington.
In addition, the commission is the subject of increased interest in the run-up to possible leadership changes at the anti-corruption body from February to July.
