RBSC

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Its Llewellyn by a KO: Christie out cold!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Its Llewellyn by a KO: Christie out cold!

    Christie, Llewellyn and Tufton — a cause for concern

    Thursday, September 30, 2010

    var addthis_pub="jamaicaobserver";



    WE, frankly, are increasingly fretful about recent developments involving Contractor General Mr Greg Christie, Director of Public Prosecutions Miss Paula Llewellyn and Agriculture Minister Dr Christopher Tufton.
    Because perceptions are terribly important, sometimes even more than reality, it doesn't matter that what might be happening is nothing more than appearances of a quarrel among them.
    The sequence of events suggests a spat between Mr Christie on the one side and Miss Llewellyn and Dr Tufton on the other.
    First, the contractor general in his 2009 report to Parliament slapped the DPP's office, among other State agencies, for their alleged tardiness in acting on the recommendations arising out of his investigations. The media immediately ran with the story.
    The following day, the OCG dispatched a news release in which Mr Christie was at pains to clarify that he had not fingered the DPP specifically and to lay the blame for that suggestion squarely at the feet of an unnamed media house.
    This left us to wonder if in-between he might have received an angry telephone call from Miss Llewellyn questioning his claims about tardiness.
    Within days of that, the DPP published her response to some of the matters involving Dr Tufton, his permanent secretary Mr Donovan Stanberry, and former banker Aubyn Hill, which were referred to her by Mr Christie's OCG. Here's where it gets troubling.
    Miss Llewellyn used some pretty strong words amounting to a chastisement in explaining why she could not acquiesce to Mr Christie's wishes to have her file criminal charges against the three men whom he had accused of perjury in the matter of the hiring of Mr Hill, the point man in the divestment of five state-owned sugar estates.
    She said, for example, that her office would be "severely embarrassed" should it attempt to convince the court that the men were guilty of wilfully misleading the OCG's probe of Mr Hill's multi-million dollar consultancy contract from the Government.
    • Furthermore: "As a matter of common sense and criminal practice and procedure, a prosecutor does not embark on a case where it is clear from the beginning that one cannot overcome a no-case submission."
    For his part, the agriculture minister, in similarly upbraiding Mr Christie, called for a review of the legislation governing the operations of the OCG.
    The minister in a statement urged "a greater level of interaction between public servants and the contractor general before cases are referred to the DPP and disseminated to the media".
    Dr Tufton was mindful that because of the prevailing perception "that the public service is inherently corrupt, the contractor general... may unwittingly influence public opinion and perception in relation to corruption in Government's contracts award system".
    "Within this context, it is critical that the contractor general exercises the utmost care in his investigation to understand context motives and intent before recommending criminal prosecution, as once he makes these recommendations to charge public servants, the said public servants' reputations immediately come under attack in the court of public opinion," he cautioned.
    While both Miss Llewellyn and Dr Tufton praised the work of the OCG, it was difficult not to sense the tension.
    These three government operatives are critical to good governance and the fight against corruption. We cannot afford a verbal brawl among them, no matter how skilfully disguised.


    .social {overflow:hidden;height:26px;float:left;margin:0;p adding:0 0 0 8px;border:1px solid #bbb;background:url(http://www.geek.com/wp-content/theme...gn/fade-bg.gif) repeat-x;list-style:none;line-height:26px;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;-webkit-border-radius:2px;-moz-border-radius:2px;}.social li {float:left;}.social li a {display:block;padding:0 9px;border-left:1px solid #bbb;}.social li.delicious a,.social li.digg a,.social li.reddit a,.social li.stumble a,.social li.twitter a,.social li.facebook a {padding-left:25px;border-left:none;background:url(http://www.geek.com/wp-content/theme.../delicious.gif) no-repeat 5px 50%;}.social li.delicious a {background-image:url(http://www.geek.com/wp-content/themes/geek6/images/share-this/delicious.gif);}.social li.digg a {background-image:url(http://www.geek.com/wp-content/themes/geek6/images/share-this/digg.gif);}.social li.reddit a {background-image:url(http://www.geek.com/wp-content/themes/geek6/images/share-this/reddit.gif);}.social li.facebook a {background-image:url(http://www.geek.com/wp-content/themes/geek6/images/share-this/facebook-icon.gif);}.social li.stumble a {background-image:url(http://www.geek.com/wp-content/themes/geek6/images/share-this/stumbleupon.gif);}.social li.twitter a {background-image:url(http://www.geek.com/wp-content/themes/geek6/images/share-this/twitter.GIF);}
    The same type of thinking that created a problem cannot be used to solve the problem.
Working...
X