By Fay Simmons

Tribune Business Reporter

jsimmons@tribunemedia.net

The Attorney General yesterday maintained there is no need for an Integrity Commission given that the Independent Commission of Investigations will conduct the same level of scrutiny and oversight.

Speaking in the Senate yesterday, Ryan Pinder KC explained that the established in the Independent Commission of Investigations Bill will investigate security forces and government officials. Creating an Integrity Commission, he argued, would duplicate costs and tasks.

“We have heard the leader of the Opposition and others speak about the need for an Integrity Commission, and what we are doing doesn’t go far enough. I would encourage those who are making these comments, including the Leader of the Opposition, to please read the legislation,” said Mr Pinder.

“In some Caribbean jurisdictions you will see an Independent Commission that investigates security forces, and an Integrity Commission that investigates the other government officials. We took the approach that we would implement the equivalent scope. However, we thought it more efficient and effective that one commission perform the functions rather than two.

“If you look at the content of the Independent Commission of Investigations Bill, and the list of government officials that it covers, our Bill accomplishes the same thing as an Integrity Commission without duplicating the cost and effort of having two commissions. We believe the Bill is fit for purpose with one commission.”

Mr Pinder said the Independent Commission of Investigations Bill, Protected Disclosures Bill and Ombudsman Bill are the “most aggressive anti-corruption legislative agenda in my lifetime”.

“These two Bills are critical components of these commitments and to our anti-corruption strategy, and will work hand in hand with the Ombudsman Act, which we previously passed into law. The Ombudsman Act 2024 was enacted to provide for the establishment of an Office of the Ombudsman, which will ensure that every public officer acts in accordance with its mandate and in compliance with fundamental freedoms and human rights,” said Mr Pinder.

“Collectively this suite of legislation will combat corruption and wrongdoing in the public and private sectors, the most aggressive anti-corruption legislative agenda in my lifetime.”

Mr Pinder added that a key component of the Protected Disclosure regime is strong protections for employees who disclose wrongdoing. The legislation also provides safeguards against retaliation including disciplinary action, dismissal and harassment.

“A person who makes a disclosure is protected from civil, criminal or disciplinary proceedings related to the disclosure. Further, the identity of employees making protected disclosures are required to be kept confidential,” said Mr Pinder.

“Employees who come forth and disclose wrongdoing are protected from occupational detriment due to their disclosure. Occupational detriment may include disciplinary action, dismissal, harassment, refusal of transfer or promotion.

“Protection against the commencement of proceedings by employers who claim breach of contract for disclosing wrongdoing are also extended to employees under the Bill, ensuring provisions in contracts of employment which purport to prevent any disclosure are unable to prevent protected disclosures of wrongdoing from occurring.”