Public watchdogs are instruments of discipline

Edward Seaga, Contributor

When Prime Minister Bruce Golding inadvertently commented in the House of Representatives, "Give me another Greg Christie," it served to pay Contractor General Christie a supreme accolade that spoke for the feelings of a great many people who value the work of the fearless administration.

The remark of the prime minister certainly concurred with my own feelings, which I have already said to Mr Christie. But there is far more to this passing reference concerning a truly diligent public servant.

When I proposed the establishment of the post of contractor general in 1979, I was, as opposition spokesman of finance and chairman of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) in the House of Representatives, experiencing mounting exasperation at the corrupt use of public funds on various projects under examination by the PAC. I followed my proposal for establishing the post with introduction of a bill in the House of Representatives which I asked Bruce Golding to guide through the legislative process. After the establishment, the position did not live up to expectations because holders of the post, while being honourable men, were not aggressive enough in fighting the malpractices and violations brought to their attention.

Greg Christie has changed the game plan. He and his staff have created a model of administration with energy and integrity which is having a tremendous effect on the probity of public business. To hear talk among public servants, few dare take chances because of the intrepid nature of the approach of the Office of the Contractor General. This is having a sweeping effect, which is cutting off administrative malpractices at the root and deterring corruption in general.

Christie has drawn some public ire for his penchant to go public with investigations at times even before the probes are under way. But the essential point is being overlooked. The more publicity, the more people support he receives. This is his 'backative' to build public pressure for timely prosecution to follow. The Office of the Contractor General has no power to prosecute. This is the responsibility of the director of public prosecutions. But the Office of the DPP is already too overloaded to respond in a timely manner, resulting in inaction that reduces the bite of the OCG to a bark, diluting its effectiveness to suppress corruption.

A parallel to this can be found in the post of the public defender, which was established in 1992 to protect citizens from administrative injustice and violation of constitutional rights. I had proposed the establishment of the post in 1991 in the House of Representatives to give support to the broader provisions in the human-rights section of the Constitution which I had planned to introduce for the establishment of a Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms. The work on the charter occurred in the Constitutional Reform Commission commencing in 1993. The Office of the Public Defender is structured to enable it to enter into prosecutions through private attorneys. But its work is greatly constrained by a very limited staff and equally limited funds. It is still more so constrained, having to obtain the fiat of the attorney general for prosecution.

A further limitation is that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms has still not been enacted after 18 years of committee deliberations, debate in Parliament and the special time period required the passage of an act. This results in the inability to prosecute violations of rights which the charter has included as new rights or amendments of existing provisions. Passage of the Charter of Rights, it seems, is being frustrated by legislators of both sides, who are obviously eager to leave the door open for the State to continue to violate the rights of the people who would be protected by the enactment of the charter and a strong public defender.

Redefining public probity

The contractor general and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, backed by the Office of the Public Defender, can only serve to redefine public probity free of administrative malpractices and corruption and free of violation of constitutional rights only if they can pursue sanctions. If they are limited in this regard, they cannot be authoritative, or command the necessary level of respect to transform a corrupt society, or to create a just society, both of which should be among the most fundamental national reforms required in Jamaica today.

Now that Prime Minister Golding is proceeding with the establishment of an Office of the Special Prosecutor for corruption, perhaps the necessity of more prosecutorial activity for the Office of the Contractor General can be accommodated by the same process since their missions are largely similar. Such a move would indeed provide more bite for the bark.

I sense that there is not sufficient recognition of the broader importance of these posts created to fight injustice by failing to understand the real transformational role they play in changing the whole society for the better rather than only in the reduction of offences. It would be a great pity if this was so, for there are no better instruments to create discipline in a community of undisciplined people and justice in an unjust country. There are no more powerful instruments to achieve these missions than the contractor general, public defender and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Edward Seaga, a former prime minister, is chancellor of the University of Technology and a distinguished fellow at the University of the West Indies. Email feedback to odf@uwimona.com.