INDECOM indemnity debate set to resume

LAWMAKERS CAN now proceed with debate on legislation to indemnify the actions of officers of the Independent Commission of Investigations (INDECOM) after receiving a list of cases that the oversight body prosecuted during its first three years of operation.

“In terms of ... 2010 to 2013, the Parliament has requested of INDECOM the details of matters before the court and we have provided the information requested,” INDECOM Commissioner Hugh Faulkner told The Gleaner last week.

While debating the Independent Commission of Investigations (Amendment) Bill, 2023 recently, some parliamentarians insisted that the agency should submit a list of cases it had prosecuted before the Full Court made a ruling on whether it had prosecutorial powers.

The Full Court ruled in 2014 that INDECOM could charge police officers.

However, in 2018, the Court of Appeal reversed the 2014 ruling, stating that INDECOM did not have the power to charge police officers.

The ruling was appealed, but the United Kingdom-based Privy Council agreed with the decision of the Court of Appeal.

During the May 28 debate in Parliament, some lawmakers requested that passage of the bill be delayed so that they could examine the charges that were made against police officers to determine whether INDECOM had breached the constitutional rights of these state actors.

Asked to comment on the latest developments, the INDECOM commissioner said he would leave any legislative remedy to Parliament.

“We now leave it to the wisdom of Parliament to make a determination that would suit the interest of justice,” said Faulkner.

He pointed out that there are instances where legislation comes to address anomalies in law with regard to indemnifying persons who had been practising in a particular way and validating what they had done as actions done in good faith.

In terms of the actions of INDECOM prior to July 30, 2013, when the Full Court had made certain decisions, Faulkner indicated that the parties would have made their submissions before a court of law before any of those matters were proceeded with.

When members of the Lower House debated the legislation on May 30, Justice Minister Delroy Chuck pushed for the passage of the proposed law, which, among other things, seeks to indemnify the commission, the commissioner and employees of the entity for arrests executed and prosecutions initiated or conducted in good faith, during the period July 29, 2010 to March 16, 2018.

However, Clarendon South Western Member of Parliament Lothan Cousins pushed back against the legislation, arguing that INDECOM was on a frolic of its own even though it had consistently been cautioned that it did not have prosecutorial powers.

“I don’t believe it is right for us coming here to validate and indemnify INDECOM from its own callous actions. They were on a frolic of their own. We warned them about it several times over. We told them they needed a fiat from the DPP (director of public prosecutions) in order to prosecute. They did not listen to any of us,” Cousins said late last month.

Cousins said that officers spent significant sums for legal representation and in some instances police personnel were locked up for weeks or months and had been interdicted with half pay.

However, Chuck sought to convince his colleague lawmakers that INDECOM carried out its actions in good faith. In this regard, he said that the bill was to validate what was done based on the 2014 court ruling.

editorial@gleanerjm.com