Evidence of disintegration?
would take time to articulate its vision, mission, and purpose, as well as give the country a sense of what it intends to do to execute its mandate of preventing and prosecuting corruption.
The head of the anti-corruption advocacy groups — National Integrity Action, Professor Trevor Munroe; Jeanette Calder of Jamaica Accountability Meter Portal — have both identified that the report lacks transparency, and both are disappointed in several aspects of the report, including the fact that the two Members of Parliament in relation to whom new investigations have been opened concerning possible statutory declaration offences have not been named, and the failure to state categorically whether the prime minister has been cleared in respect of his integrity declarations. One does not sense fearlessness.
Belated updates
In what appears to be a belated discovery of issues on which activities ought to have been undertaken, the report notes on pages 11 to 12 that “…the office of the executive director intends and commits to ensuring that the commission develops and implements programmes which will allow for the realisation of (some) goals”.
The goals listed relate to raising public awareness, overseeing the awarding of government contracts, and building public confidence. The report continues (page 12): “Given the enormous mandate of the Integrity Commission, and the challenges which continue to impede the operations of the commission, the directors recognise that time is of the essence and as such recommit to ensuring that the functions of the commission are effectively implemented.”
This is a curious but also revealing statement which implies that the commission is overwhelmed by the work to be done and is blaming external factors for not getting the work done. But, perhaps thankfully, it is “recommitting”
itself. But, more pointedly, the document overall lacks the qualities of an organisational report. The focus of the submission should have been on what was planned, what was achieved, and what explains the outcomes. What is presented are complaints and excuses as well as possible future action, but no timelines or measures of success are indicated, thus one cannot describe it as an action plan.
The mandate of an anti-corruption body is to engage in corruption prevention, education, raising public awareness, investigation, and prosecution. Using this list as a benchmark, my assessment is that, except for investigations which have commenced, hardly much else has been done by the commission for a whole year. The year 2020 will therefore be a watershed year for the commission. For if it does not report and demonstrate that in 2019 it undertook activities consistent with its mandate then the commissioners might as well pack up and go.