THE Prime Minister has written to citizen, Mr. Carvil Duncan, who holds three constitutional offices- Chairman, Public Service Commission; member, Police Service Commission; and member, Judicial Service Commission- nudging him to do what is universally accepted as ethical and decent in demitting these offices at a time when he is before the court on a criminal charge. What is disturbing is that according to the press release from the Prime Minister’s office, Mr. Duncan was given 14 days within receipt of the correspondence to reply and he has failed to do so. This issue amplifies concerns by citizens who desire this nation return to one where ethics, propriety and decorum are held in esteem and government officials, elected and appointed, appreciate the fact that they are in service to the people and by extension, accountable to the people.
Where there is a constitution there is always an interpretation. Inherent in that instrument and the interpretation there is referred to as spirit and intent. It is this spirit and intent, the unwritten rules of engagement that are equally applicable to giving life and meaning to the document. An element of this spirit and intent carries with it expectation that persons who hold constitutional offices would conduct themselves in manner befitting the office. One such upstanding expectation is where accusation of impropriety is brought, the accused is expected to remove him or herself from the position, at least until such time that the issue is addressed and decided. Where a person is charged by the court and holds constitutional or public office it is reason to expect the person to remove from the position until the court has decided.
Having sworn to uphold the law and where presently there is a case before the judiciary on an allegation that is in conflict with the law, it compromises the Oath of Office to uphold the law. It also shows disregard for the Oath of Office and Rule of Law remaining in the position, while the matter is before the court for adjudication. Other government workers such as judges, permanent secretaries to the rank-and-file, when allegations of impropriety are made against them they are interdicted from duty pending the determination of an inquiry. Where members of commission and the National Assembly are accused the same principle applies. More so, these persons should not only remove themselves by taking leave but also doing the decent thing and resigning.
Outside of the court where serious allegations made against government officials, elected and appointed, it is not unfair given the importance of applying universal principles to have these to see similar action such as removing oneself to give way to an inquiry or resigning from the position. Temptations to treat such allegations through denials and mechanisms put in place to justify the wrongs should be eschewed. It is more help to the nation’s holistic well-being to put mechanisms in place to arrive at the truth and thereafter take appropriate decisions to correct same and allow the society to move.
There are precedents to the society. Complaints were made to the Ombudsman against two officials of the Forbes Burnham government by a public citizen. At the conclusion of the Ombudsman’s findings, one minister was determined culpable and that person resigned from his diplomatic posting. During the Desmond Hoyte administration, a minister’s son was charged and that minister resigned. Another minister of the said administration was accused of impropriety and he resigned giving way for a criminal investigation. Under the Bharrat Jagdeo and Donald Ramotar administrations Ministers Ronald Gajraj and Bheri Ramsarran were removed after spirited protest actions by the people. These issues outside of what have been stated above, at a personal level speak to character. If one is respecting of self and cares about the society he or she lives in, that person would not suffer the society through the embarrassment of having to deal with situations that compromise the delivery of public service and the discomfort of the people having to engage with individuals over whom clouds of impropriety hang.