Tell-all!

The Integrity Commission (IC) has asked the Supreme Court to order an investment firm and a commercial bank to release information on an undetermined number of public officials who are the subject of its investigations.

The Government’s main anti-corruption agency is seeking five orders, two of which relate to Barita Investments Limited, whose parent company is Cornerstone Financial Holdings Limited, and First Global Bank (FGB), a member of the GraceKennedy Financial Group.

A hearing in the case is scheduled for today before Justice Sarah Thompson-James, almost two months after the last appearance before a different judge who had issued certain orders. There’s no defendant, and today’s proceedings will likely not be public, as the matter is scheduled to be in chambers.

The issues are not clear, as IC declined to speak on the matter Monday, saying it would answer The Gleaner’s questions when the case is over.

“It is not our practice to comment on details of matters presently before the court,” said Gillian Pottinger, legal counsel for the commission.

The law also blocks the commission from talking about its investigations until a report is tabled in Parliament.

Barita and FGB separately told this newspaper that they have not been served any documents in relation to the case, with the investment house adding that it was not aware of any court action initiated by the commission.

The IC has asked the Supreme Court for a declaration on how Section 7(2) and Section 7(8) of the Integrity Commission Act should be interpreted.

Section 7(2) says a person or body must cooperate with the commission in the exercise of its functions under the act or any other law.

Under Section 7(8), any person or body cooperating with the commission shall not be prevented from doing so by any other law that provides for secrecy or other restrictions against disclosure, except on the basis of legal professional privilege.

The IC wants the Supreme Court to issue an order directing Barita and FGB to comply with its request made under Section 7 in letters to both entities dated June 28, 2021.

The commission has also sought an order to allow it to keep confidential other information that accompanied the requests to the financial institutions.

The claim form, obtained by The Gleaner, was signed by Craig Beresford, the director of information and complaints. The agency is being represented by Annaliesa Lindsay of the firm Lindsay Law Chambers.

Barita said it received two letters from the commission, dated June 28 and July 21, 2021, “for the provision of certain information in relation to public officials” and that responses were provided on the 19th and 29th of July.

The investment company told the IC that it was “more than willing to comply with all requests from the commission, provided such requests are made in accordance with the requirements of the relevant governing legislation or pursuant to a court order,” a statement said.

Barita said it has not received any further correspondence from the commission since July 29 in relation to the requests.

“We also take seriously our legal and moral obligations to keep clients’ information confidential, and our further obligation to ensure that our clients’ personal information is disclosed in accordance with clear statutory requirements,” read the statement issued to The Gleaner.

It added that Barita was also “mindful” of the increasing importance being placed on the protection of data and, in particular, personal information.

FGB did not speak specifically to any request from the IC or what its response was, noting, instead, that “from time to time” it gets requests from regulators for customer information.

“We endeavour, at all times, to cooperate and to assist the various regulatory authorities in the execution of their duties in accordance with applicable law. In providing such assistance, we are always mindful of our obligation of confidentiality to our customers, which we believe is one of the bedrock principles upon which the financial sector operates,” an FGB statement said.

While the Banking Services Act prohibits disclosure of customer information to unauthorised persons or entities, it creates exceptions such as requirement by another law, court orders, or whether it is in the interest of the bank.

The court action of the IC came months after the country learnt in July that two parliamentarians and six public officials were being investigated by the IC for illicit enrichment with a similar number of lawmakers and public officials being referred for prosecution for allegedly providing false information to the IC in their statutory declarations.

It’s not clear whether those cases are connected to the requests for Barita and FGB to produce information.

Just over a month after the Jamaican Integrity Commission filed its court action, the UK-based Privy Council ruled that the Turks and Caicos Integrity Commission only had the power to demand documents from third parties such as banks when formal investigations have been initiated.

The Privy Council, which is the final court of appeal for Jamaica and the Turks and Caicos Islands, said such power did not exist in the normal course of the commission’s functions such as examining statutory declarations.

The arrangements appear different in the Jamaican law, where the power to summon witnesses and demand documents rests with the director of investigations, whose probes are accepted as formal enquiries.

Examinations of statutory declarations are done by the director of information and complaints who may refer matters to the director of investigations.

jovan.johnson@gleanerjm.com