"* we take this matter of an unauthorised publication by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) of data held by the online companies registry very seriously.*"

I wonder if they've realized as yet that this **exactly** what Fitzgerald did. He revealed private information that he received, knowing full well that the person who delivered it was not authorized to transfer the info, and he himself having no authorization to reveal it.

("Private" meaning data access is restricted)

Comrades! Here the AG is grandstanding again when she must know that all her emphasizing how the unauthorized publication of the data by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists dubbed 'the Bahamas Paper' - was a very serious matter.
The data on the corporate registry is already publicly accessible which typically consist of names of the companies, creation dates, addresses and in some cases they’ll have director or owner names clearly listed for viewing and downloading. The only 'unauthorized; serious matter is that the government just didn't get their greedy hands on the ridiculously high $10 Fee they couldn't collect to view per document.
Maybe the AG might could try billing the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists - the uncollected $10 Fee per document viewed and downloaded.

The issue isn't whether the data is publicly known, it's whether it's publicly accessible. Imagine someone taking an email from the PM's account that had the annual budget report attached. You might say, "well everyone sees the budget report, what's the big deal?". It's not the information, it's the access and the implications of that access.

This has implications for ANY piece of data stored including salaries, VAT filings and VAT returns. Would you want your company's VAT filings published?

For Fitzgerald to continuously repeat that he would "do it again", he simply doesn't care about the damage he's done to the country. His argument about protecting his name is ridiculous, nobody call his name and just the other day his former driver and campaign general, who is apparently well known on the streets, was convicted of drug trafficking. If I were ICIJ and the AG approached me about this "very serious matter", I'd simply say your cabinet colleague Fitzgerald said it was ok.

Comrade ThisIsOurs, you can stop with the asking others to imagine someone taking an email from the PM's account - cause he must not be reading his emails. It is now almost a full year since I emailed the PM a picture of my backyard goat, asking him what he thinks about my goat -King's Counsel Red Shirts, and he never replied a word.

Lol ok

Nobody answers emails in the Bahamas. It is too complicated for their simple brains. All their brain cycles are taken up by trying to figure out how to screw each other (figuratively & literally).

If it was a "leak" it means that someone in the Registrar Generals's Dept. is complicit. If the system was hacked it is a different ballgame, one that in the AG's office is way out of their league. The AG reffered to it as a leak, so go and arrest the person or persons responsible. Show us how "swift justice" works. I await with bated breath.

It all comes down to not letting idiots to handle your data. So in short, if you don't want any exposure of business you do simply don't do it in the Bahamas or other third world countries run by idiots. The Bahamas are known for their bad education and high crime-rate. It's common knowledge that officials don't give a flying fuck about anything unless there is something on the table they could grab. So how can you even remotely assume that creating a database of all corporate information in the Bahamas is a good thing ?

Comrade BaronInvest, the problem the world over is when government services have been privatized those who get the contracts are politically connected to the government in power and have have continued to deliver below standard services and at higher costs to the users. What is happening at BEC is a perfect example, and BTC has chiefly served to enrich the foreign owners whilst continuing to to be an open door to political appointments and constituents job placements by their governing MP's.
Fact is with privatization comes more costs not only for end user services but to the taxpayers'. The politically flexibility to be accountability to taxpayers come election time is removed under privatization but not the costs and the political appointments. Take a closer look at BPL and BTC and you will appreciate what I am talking about.

oh so NOW putting out private information to the public is a problem?

This Wicked Witch (Maynard-Gibson) is completely and utterly incompetent when it comes to just about anything except thinking of her own selfish interests and putting ill-gotten gains in her bank account!

You're so right....she is one nut-head that proves nuts like her never fall far from the tree....and we all know which corrupt tree she fell from.

An infringement on our sovereignty.. thats what it is. .