.

Issue formal and public diplomatic requests to the United States Government for the immediate disclosure of the implicated individual's identity.

Statement on the Handling of Allegations by Prime Minister Philip “Brave” Davis

The recent revelations regarding the alleged involvement of a high-ranking Bahamian politician in a federal indictment by the U.S. Southern District of New York highlight the dire need for accountability, transparency, and forthrightness from our nation's leadership. Prime Minister Philip “Brave” Davis' public remarks on this matter have done little to reassure the Bahamian people or safeguard our country's reputation on the international stage.

The Prime Minister's suggestion that U.S. officials have refused to provide the name of the implicated politician raises serious questions about the strength and execution of our bilateral agreements with the United States. Such agreements, rooted in mutual cooperation and trust, should ensure the timely and accurate exchange of information, particularly in cases that directly implicate national security and governance. If the Prime Minister is insinuating that the United States is failing to honour its commitments, this assertion must be substantiated with concrete evidence.

Moreover, his comments attempting to divert attention to unrelated issues within the U.S. undermine the gravity of the allegations at hand. While corruption is a global challenge, the Bahamian government's responsibility lies in addressing the accusations against its own officials, not deflecting by pointing fingers elsewhere. This approach not only tarnishes the integrity of his administration but also detracts from the nation's efforts to restore its image as a trustworthy and law-abiding jurisdiction.

The Bahamian people deserve decisive action and clear answers. If the Prime Minister and his administration are genuinely committed to rooting out corruption, they must:

1. Issue a formal and public diplomatic request to the United States for the immediate disclosure of the implicated individual's identity, as provided under the relevant bilateral agreements.

2. Conduct an independent and thorough investigation into the allegations, led by an impartial entity with no ties to the government or political parties.

3. Commit to full transparency throughout the process, ensuring that those found guilty are held accountable, regardless of their rank or affiliation.

Anything less than these measures would signal a failure of leadership and an unwillingness to uphold the principles of justice and good governance. By attempting to shield the implicated individual or obscure the truth, the Prime Minister risks further eroding public trust and damaging The Bahamas' standing on the world stage.

If the PLP administration were to adopt a firm stance similar to that of President Ali, it would risk losing 90% of its support base, which is largely sustained by an entrenched system of corruption. For instance, there have been cases of senior financial officials approving invoices that are inflated to four times the advertised cost, even for contracts that ostensibly underwent the bidding process. Furthermore, Brave lacks the 'balls' to confront Bahamian Permanent Secretaries and technical staff in such a decisive manner.

Deputy Prime Minister Cooper, I am surprised by your decision to challenge the DEA's intelligence and investigative processes publicly. Having worked with such agencies in the past, I can attest that their surveillance and case-building are exhaustive, with meticulous attention to detail before any case is presented to a grand jury. This is not an area where conjecture or deflection serves well. I strongly advise reserving public commentary until the trial concludes and all evidence is presented. Premature statements can only complicate matters further.

@ThisIsOurs

It seems you may not be familiar with how the Government of the Bahamas' rfp "bib Process" works. After a bid is won, the situation often changes dramatically. What was initially proposed or agreed upon frequently transforms into something entirely different.

With the Ministry of Finance overseeing technology in the Bahamas, you can often trace their "fingerprints" on nearly every technological implementation. So, when you say, "read the specs," it’s not that simple. The intentional confusion embedded in the process benefits not only the vendor but also those in positions to make the final technical and financial decisions.

This isn’t speculation—I’ve experienced it firsthand.

"criminal conspiracy" my friend

Companies often exploit proprietary restrictions, locking basic functions like updating dates or adding users behind costly barriers to maximize profits. This strategy forces users into expensive maintenance contracts for tasks that could easily be managed on the front end.

A glaring example of such abuse affecting the Bahamian people is the $95K DigiTag Solo License Plate Printer at the Prison, which comes with a $75K annual maintenance contract or the cost for DataTorque to issue reports. This turns simple upkeep, like roller cleaning, into an unjustifiable financial burden.

The bigger question remains: Who holds this contract, and why was the country left without vehicle license plates for almost two years? Did anyone in the current administration investigate or attempt to resolve this glaring inefficiency, or is this a case of deliberate neglect or criminal conspiracy?

> Inside Deal Gone Bad?

*Omni Financial Group and Affiliates File Breach of Contract and Defamation Claim Against Government, Pointing to Political and Business Connections Behind the Dispute*

Omni Financial Group, along with its affiliates and Peter Maury, president of the Association of Bahamas Marinas (ABM), has filed a breach of contract and defamation claim against the Government. They allege "irreparable damage" caused by the Ministry of Finance’s claims that fees collected from foreign boaters via the SeaZPass portal were not properly paid to the Public Treasury.

Harvey Morris, director of Omni, stated in a November 28, 2024, affidavit that an independent audit confirmed no missing funds. The audit found "reconciling items" explaining the $43,664 discrepancy.

Omni’s records show that $4.493 million in foreign yacht charter and cruising permit fees were collected, contradicting claims by Simon Wilson, the Ministry of Finance’s financial secretary, that up to $5 million was not remitted to the Government.

The legal claim argues that Wilson’s statements have damaged Omni’s reputation and business, undermining relationships. Additionally, it asserts that the ten-year agreement with the Ministry to operate the boating fee portal is still valid due to the Government’s failure to properly terminate it.

Omni’s $3.473 million damages claim includes $3.35 million for portal development costs and $122,500 in commission income. Legal documents suggest that had the contract continued, over $58 million in fees would have been collected, yielding $1.9 million in commissions.

In response, the Government has filed a counterclaim for breach of contract, accusing Omni and ABM of failing to reinvest 10% of collected funds as agreed and not providing access to the SeaZPass system’s back-end process.

The issue of not providing the Ministry with access to the back-end process of the SeaZPass system sounds remarkably similar to the ongoing experience the Road Traffic Department has had with the DataTorque Transport Management System. This lack of transparency, the Government argues, created significant challenges in matching payments to applications and processing permits efficiently.

This situation has raised suspicions about Simon Wilson’s alleged connections to several companies—IslandWide Cabling & Consulting, JDL, Walker’s Industry, DataTorque, and others believed to be linked to him. These ties have led to public speculation about potential conflicts of interest, especially in light of accusations of political interference and patronage.

Critics argue that these business relationships may have influenced the Government’s decision to cancel Omni’s contract, suggesting a possible personal or business motive behind the move.

**(3) The Necessity of Reform Beyond Rhetoric**
While the PLP faces these internal and external pressures, the reality is that systemic reform is no longer optional. The Davis administration must recognize that the international community, particularly the United States, is unlikely to tolerate the continuation of entrenched corruption. The Independent Commission of Investigations Bill, while an important first step, must be followed by actions that demonstrate tangible accountability.

**Recommendations for Navigating This Reality:**
Engage Support Base in Reform Efforts: The administration must educate its supporters on the necessity of accountability and the long-term benefits of transparent governance. This involves shifting the political culture away from cronyism and favouritism.

*Strengthen Leadership Credibility:* Brave Davis must proactively address concerns about his reputation by demonstrating a personal commitment to reform through transparency, ethical leadership, and cooperation with international partners.

*Expand the Bill’s Scope:* The Bill must include measures to address corruption beyond law enforcement, extending its reach to all areas of government, including ministers, ministries, and departments.

*Independent Oversight:* To gain international trust, the Davis administration should establish mechanisms for external oversight of reform efforts, ensuring impartiality and credibility.

**(4) Dr. Minnis’ Position:** Enforcement Alone is Not Enough
While Dr. Minnis’ emphasis on enforcing existing laws is valid, it overlooks the systemic issues that have prevented those laws from being effective. The entrenched culture of corruption within the RBPF and government cannot be dismantled through enforcement alone. Structural and cultural reforms, as proposed in the Independent Commission of Investigations Bill, are essential to addressing the root causes of corruption.

**Comparison to Dr. Minnis’ Tenure:**
It is worth noting that during his own tenure, Dr. Minnis also faced criticism for not fully addressing corruption. His administration’s failure to introduce and enforce similar reforms weakens his argument against the current administration’s efforts.

The Davis administration is navigating a political minefield where reform efforts risk alienating its traditional support base while inaction risks further international isolation and reputational damage. The Independent Commission of Investigations Bill is a step in the right direction, but it must be supported by expanded reforms and cultural shifts to address systemic corruption comprehensively.

Prime Minister Davis must demonstrate bold leadership, both by enforcing laws and embracing structural reforms, to rebuild trust domestically and internationally. The PLP must decide whether it will perpetuate the status quo or embrace accountability, knowing that the latter is the only path to restoring The Bah’ credibility and ensuring its long-term stability.

> Response to Dr. Minnis’ Criticism:

Addressing Systemic Realities and Political Culture
Dr. Minnis' criticism of the Independent Commission of Investigations Bill, 2024, must be evaluated within the broader context of the political culture in The Bahamas. While the Bill represents a significant step toward addressing corruption, the challenges facing the Davis administration go beyond legislative reform. They are deeply rooted in the PLP’s historical political culture, which fosters expectations of cronyism, favouritis, and victimization among its support base. These systemic issues complicate the administration's ability to enforce laws and operate with full accountability.

**1. The PLP’s Dilemma: Accountability vs. Political Support**
The Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) faces a fundamental conflict between governance and maintaining its political base. For decades, the PLP’s culture of governance has been tied to practices that include cronyism and favouritis. Many supporters expect preferential treatment, creating a political environment where reform efforts are often perceived as a betrayal of the party’s identity.

**Implications for Accountability:**
Lose Support Base: If the Davis administration fully commits to enforcing anti-corruption measures and operating with transparency, it risks alienating a significant portion of its support base, who have grown accustomed to preferential treatment.
International Isolation: Conversely, failing to adopt and enforce meaningful reforms will further erode The Bahamas' reputation in the international community, particularly with the United States, which is already wary of systemic corruption.
The Davis administration is caught between these two paths, and its choices will define the nation's trajectory for years to come.

**2. The Challenge of Leadership Credibility**
Prime Minister Philip “Brave” Davis enters this debate with his own credibility challenges. His reputation—tainted by past allegations of affiliations with drug-related activities—adds another layer of complexity. Internationally, such perceptions cast doubt on his administration’s commitment to anti-corruption initiatives. If the United States and other international partners distrust Davis, they are likely to bypass his government in favor of external interventions, as seen with recent U.S. indictments of Bahamian law enforcement officials.

**Impact on Reform Efforts:**

*Trust Deficit:* Davis’ reputation could weaken the perceived legitimacy of reforms, even if well-intentioned, as international observers may question his motivations.

*Heightened Scrutiny:* Any perceived hesitation or leniency in enforcing anti-corruption measures could exacerbate international pressure and further isolate The Bahamas on the global stage.

*continue in reply:*

> The Bahamas Must Protect Its
> Sovereignty and Chart a Resilient
> Future Amid Emerging Geopolitical
> Threats

The recent proposal by the incoming Trump administration to deport migrants to The Bahamas, rejected decisively by Prime Minister Philip Davis, is both unsurprising and deeply concerning. It reflects a broader disregard for the sovereignty and well-being of nations outside the immediate interests of the United States. This unilateral approach to policy, a hallmark of Donald Trump's presidency, underscores the dangerous implications of another Trump term for The Bahamas and the wider Caribbean.

The Bahamas, like many of its Caribbean neighbours, has long recognized the pressing need to diversify its economy and reduce its reliance on tourism and external partnerships that are vulnerable to political whims. This latest incident is a stark reminder that the region must act decisively to safeguard its economic, social, and political stability.

Donald Trump’s track record of prioritizing his own circle of influence while neglecting or marginalizing others is no secret. His "America First" doctrine often translates into "America Only," with little regard for the ripple effects on smaller nations. The suggestion to impose the burden of migrant deportations on The Bahamas—without consultation or consideration for our limited resources—illustrates the dangers of such policies.

Furthermore, the broader Caribbean faces significant threats under another Trump administration. His neglect of climate change, withdrawal from global agreements like the Paris Accord, and frequent dismissal of the needs of developing nations present existential challenges to island states already grappling with rising sea levels and increasingly devastating storms.

**A Call for Action**

In light of these challenges, The Bahamas must strengthen its commitment to economic diversification, pursuing sectors such as renewable energy, sustainable fisheries, technology, and the blue economy. We must build a future that is less reliant on the unpredictability of external powers.

At the same time, Caribbean nations must unite, leveraging their collective voice to advocate for fair treatment and mutual respect on the global stage. Regional solidarity and strategic international alliances will be critical in navigating the uncertain waters of global politics.
The Bahamas rejects any policies that compromise its sovereignty or place undue burdens on its people. While we remain committed to maintaining strong ties with the United States, it must be made clear that our nation will not be a convenient solution for policies that disregard our capacity or autonomy.

***The government of The Bahamas stands firm in its commitment to protecting the dignity, security, and prosperity of its people.***