On February 27, 2002 — exactly 10 years ago today — Bahamians went to the polls in the country’s first referendum... ...A decade after that vote, The Bahamas is still behind many in the so-called civilized world in some respects... ...By voting "no" Bahamians ensured that the country remained in the archaic position of having discriminatory language in its Constitution

A cause for change

Bahamas should revisit issues in failed 2002 referendum

By Candia Dames
Guardian News Editor
candia@nasguard.com

There’s an interesting saying in the tropical Southeastern Asian country of Burma: A woman can be equal to a man in all ways, but she must first die and come back as a man. In the 21st century, it would appear that this very saying could be applied right here in The Bahamas.

On February 27, 2002 — exactly 10 years ago today — Bahamians went to the polls in the country’s first referendum.

They were asked by Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham to vote to change the Constitution to eradicate language that made men superior to women.

But in results that Ingraham later admitted "shocked and shamed" him, an overwhelming majority of the voters — women included — voted against the historic change. It was an interesting outcome indeed for a people who have for a long time prided themselves on being among the most progressive in the Western Hemisphere, at least as far as civil liberties are concerned.

A decade after that vote, The Bahamas is still behind many in the so-called civilized world in some respects. By voting "no" Bahamians ensured that the country remained in the archaic position of having discriminatory language in its Constitution.

The results also appeared contradictory to the fact that The Bahamas’ record on the treatment of women and the role of women in society has been a commendable one.

The prime minister’s commitment to improving equality of the sexes was a plank in his campaign platform in 1997.

Ingraham noted in 2002 that for far too long, the Constitution has held double standards; a state of affairs that for too many years deprived the children of Bahamian women, married to foreign nationals, of citizenship; and denied the foreign-born spouses of Bahamian women the right to be registered as Bahamians, a right granted by the Constitution to the spouses of Bahamian men.

There is a classic example of a family negatively impacted by that constitutional provision. The late Dr. Mary Ritchie, a Bahamian woman, married a Trinidadian and they moved to The Bahamas before independence in 1973. The couple’s children who were born before independence automatically became Bahamians. But their children born after 1973 had to obtain work permits to be legally employed there.

Timothy Donaldson, a former Bahamian senator and the country’s former ambassador to the United States, said he has always been "incensed and ashamed" by the constitutional language in this regard. Donaldson was an advisor to the Pindling government during the constitutional negotiations in London.

"To me it’s just not right," Donaldson said. He explained that the thinking of then Prime Minister Pindling was that the provision would ensure that Haitians would not eventually take over The Bahamas which at the time had a population of only about 220,000 and today has a population of well over 300,000.

The country has long been burdened by an ongoing influx of Haitians who come to the country in rickety sea crafts, fleeing the unstable political regime in their poverty-stricken nation.

The Haitian presence in The Bahamas has continued to expand over the decades.

Between 1970 and 2010 births to Haitian mothers in The Bahamas nearly doubled, jumping from 7.2 percent to 13.7 percent, according to a new report released by The Department of Statistics.

"Pindling said ‘These Haitians produce like rats’," Donaldson said. "He said they’re going to produce all those children and at some point in time, the Haitians will outnumber Bahamians. But when you make a law geared at just one particular group of people, it’s certainly not a good policy."

The inequality clause is an entrenched provision of the Constitution. These provisions deal with the fundamental rights and freedoms of people as citizens, establishment and powers of Parliament, the cabinet and judiciary. Entrenched provisions can only be changed by 3/4 vote in Parliament, which happened in 2002, and a majority vote by the people in a referendum, which did not happen. To add provisions to the Bahamian Constitution also requires a referendum. The 2002 referendum sought to both change provisions and add clauses to the Constitution which was written in 1972.

Parliamentary exchange

The inequality issue, undoubtedly the most contentious, was not the only question posed to the Bahamian electorate in the referendum: Initially, the following questions were crafted by legislators.

1 - Do you approve of a Teaching Service Commission?

2 - Do you approve of an Independent Parliamentary Commissioner?

3 - Do you approve of the creation of an Independent Boundaries Commission?

4 - Do you approve amending the Constitution to increase the normal retirement age of judges from 67 to 72 for the Supreme Court, and up to 75 for the Court of Appeal justices? and,

5 - Do you approve amending The Constitution to permit the foreign spouse of a Bahamian citizen to reside and work in The Bahamas for the first five years of marriage, and thereafter entitled to citizenship?

6 - Do you agree that all forms of discrimination against women, their children and spouses should be removed from the Constitution and that no person should be discriminated against on the grounds of gender?

Ingraham made the announcement in the House of Assembly on December 6, 2001, informing members that it was the government’s intention to have the referendum on the same day as the next general election so that The Bahamas could "kill two birds with one stone".

"Election time is the time when you are likely to get the maximum number of persons to participate in the process," he said, "and so it is our intent to hold a referendum on the same day as the election."

On December 6, 2001, Ingraham drew attention to the discrimination question and gave it an early highlight as the key issue in the upcoming referendum.

"The one dealing with discrimination against women is fundamental and we propose to move that and as I understand it, there is consensus in the House in support of that particular amendment," Ingraham said. He told Parliament that he had in hand letters from the leader of the opposition, Perry Christie, and the only third party member in the House at the time, Dr. Bernard Nottage, that registered their support.

By the afternoon of December 20, 38 of the 40 members of the House voted on a sweeping amendment to the Constitution to abolish discrimination against women, their children and spouses.

"At last, 28 years following our independence, we are acting to remove from the supreme law of our land constitutionally-mandated discriminatory provisions against 50 percent of the population of The Bahamas," the prime minister said. "This is heavy stuff."

On January 16, members of the House of Assembly — with the exception of Dr. Nottage — approved the package of constitutional bills. Before his vote, Christie had this to say:

“We are headed for general elections. Those of us in the opposition have a view of what is fair.  If we regard the process [of the referendum] as unfair, then this is what will happen.  We will criticize and go to the country on the basis that this is an illegitimate course of action being advocated and you should not participate or you should vote no.”

A failed process

A month of public debates on the approaching referendum gave way to Referendum Day. What appeared to be a valiant and noble effort by the government to bring The Bahamas in compliance with international conventions that it endorsed, turned into a national debacle.

On all five questions, the majority of voters voted no

• Creation of an independent election boundaries commission.

Valid "Yes" 30,903

Valid "No" Votes: 57,291

• Creation of an Independent Parliamentary Commissioner.

Valid "Yes" 30,418

Valid "No" Votes: 57,815

• Gender discriminating language will be removed from the constitution and if children born to Bahamian mothers and foreign fathers will have Bahamian citizenship.

Valid "Yes" 29,906

Valid "No" Votes: 58,055

• The retirement age of judges will change from 60 to 65 years of age and 68 to 72 for appellate court judges.

Valid "Yes" 25,018

Valid "No" Votes: 60,838

• The creation of a commission to monitor the standards of teachers nationally.

Valid "Yes" 32,892

Valid "No" Votes: 55,627

For the opposition, the resounding no votes amounted to a great victory.  The Progressive Liberal Party celebrated the win as if it were celebrating election victory.

“The clear and unmistakable signal that the Bahamian people telegraphed yesterday is that they do not want any government messing with “their things” unless they, the people, are fully included in the process of constitutional reform from start to finish — and that the process of constitutional reform must never be rushed,” Christie said the morning after the vote.

The day after, Prime Minister Ingraham — who had called the referendum his last major agenda as leader of the country —  stunned many Bahamians when he said he was “ashamed” that Bahamians rejected his proposed amendments to the Constitution.  He also told reporters that he was “mistaken” when he declared that the party that won the referendum would win the general election.

“I have no regrets whatsoever,” he said.  “People are perfectly entitled to accept or reject any proposition put to them and they rejected this proposition.  I accept that this is their entitlement.  I move on.  I am ashamed, but I accept it.  That is the will of the people.”

When he returned as prime minister in 2007, I asked Ingraham at his first press conference after his re-election whether he was minded to re-visit the 2002 referendum questions.

Ingraham said there will be no more referenda under his watch.

But the prime minister has been known to change his mind.

In 2010, he advised that if re-elected his administration would hold a referendum so Bahamians could decide whether they want gambling legalized.

Whatever government is elected this year ought to take another look at the discriminatory questions in our Constitution.

Perhaps in a less politically charged atmosphere, we could finally succeed in making the necessary changes.

Feb 27, 2012

thenassauguardian

Caribbean Blog International

The Bahamas Lottery says: It's time to legalise lottery betting in The Bahamas

ONE would have to be a hermit in a cave not to be aware of the fact that wagering on the numbers is a national pastime. It's widely available throughout almost all parts of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas.

Tickets for the lotteries in the USA are also widely available. I understand that a wager on the numbers can be made online. Anyway I suspect that most of the readers of this column probably know more about the subject than I do.

The question that therefore arises is why have not these activities been legalized with the result that they would make a contribution to the revenue. There is no doubt that the revenue is needed. There is also no doubt that the majority of Bahamians find these activities acceptable. There should also be little doubt that the authorities tolerate these activities because they take place in the open and are not stopped. We should also remember that throughout history governments have failed whenever they have tried to legislate morality.

Conventional wisdom informs us that should any government move to legalize the numbers or lottery business there would be an outcry from most churches. Notwithstanding the fact that their members participate in these activities. The solution maybe to put the question to a referendum so as to avoid it being a political football. It is really a social issue. We should also remember that a law which is ignored by most citizens and which the authorities, over an extended period of time, have chosen to ignore as well, has no moral authority. Possibly it may not have any legal authority because I suspect it is illegal to only selectively enforce any law.

The time has come to legalize these activities. The people have spoken with their wagers. If that is not a case of the people putting their money where their mouth is, I don't know what is.

February 24, 2012

tribune242

Caribbean Blog International

Youth unemployment, which is pegged at 34 percent in The Bahamas, is especially a cause for concern if only because many of the young people have not yet had the opportunity to join the labor force... and as such, are being denied access to gainful employment... which is considered by many social scientists as the traditional route to the process of social integration

Youth unemployment

thenassauguardian editorial

The most recent Labour Force Survey, which was released by the Department of Statistics, contained some insightful but at the same time alarming information on the current state of unemployment in The Bahamas.


Apart from the distressingly high unemployment rate of nearly 16 percent overall and the continuing challenges to the Grand Bahamian economy, with an unemployment rate of 21.2 percent, the data on youth unemployment is perhaps the most disturbing.


Youth unemployment, which is pegged at 34 percent, is especially a cause for concern if only because many of the young people have not yet had the opportunity to join the labor force and as such, are being denied access to gainful employment which is considered by many social scientists as the traditional route to the process of social integration.


High youth unemployment is not peculiar to The Bahamas; indeed it is now recognized as a global phenomenon which is adversely impacting both developed and developing economies. Several studies on the subject have suggested that prolonged periods of unemployment among young people tend to lead to a reduction in self-esteem, diminished levels of well-being and a sense of isolation from peer groups.


Over time, youth unemployment could become problematic to the larger society since young people without the means to provide for their basic needs may not only engage in anti-social behavior, they may withdraw entirely from the labor force and by so doing, further reduce the future developmental potential of the economy.


The marginalization and social exclusion of the youth, according to some studies, are even more pronounced during a recession in that young workers are usually the first to be laid off or downsized when firms begin cost-cutting exercises. And those who remain in the labor force are disproportionately represented in the'informal'sector where they have no formal contract of employment, no guarantee of regular work and in some instances, little or no rights under labor laws. The more educated among the youth are often forced to'trade down'or accept employment far below their qualifications, and for the most part, that group is underemployed and often becomes resentful of the society or the environment in which they find themselves.


Many countries, both developing and developed have attempted to address the problem in a variety of ways including providing direct incentives to labor intensive sectors and/or establishing schemes to promote self-employment.


Both initiatives, although useful, are not the solution in isolation and ought to be part of a more comprehensive youth employment strategy which has at the centerpiece, sustained macro-economic growth for the entire economy.


To be sure, the self-employment initiative pre-supposes a widespread possession of the entrepreneurial spirit and acumen which clearly is not present in everyone, nor is it something that can be taught. It has to be recognized that the future growth and development of any society is dependent on the efficiency with which it employs its factors of production: land, capital, labor and entrepreneurial know-how. Of all the factors, it is labor that has to be continuously introduced, engaged, trained and developed at an early stage in order to be most productive.


In other words, we have to regard our youth as an asset that has to be fully integrated into the productive process and good public policy demands that young people be given priority. According to the United Nations, instead of seeing them as tomorrow's leaders, we ought to regard them as today's partners.

Feb 25, 2012

thenassauguardian editorial

Caribbean Blog International

...when the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) talk about projects stalled for review by the Free National Movement (FNM) government, the voter has to carefully examine the facts to find out exactly why they did not go ahead... ...They will soon learn that none of them was delayed or cancelled by the FNM

PLP's projects had to be completed by FNM

tribune242 editorial



THE PLP are singing their old refrain again to lull voters back to sleep.

If it's not crime increasing because police officers have been removed from the school yard, and Urban Renewal PLP-style has been revamped, then it's the collapsing economy. Apparently, the Bahamas' economy has gone into recession, not because international banks have collapsed and poor old Greece can't meet its debts, threatening to drag an already nervous world down with it, but because the FNM government, on being returned to government in 2007, made the Bahamas' recession worse "by stopping, reviewing, and cancelling PLP projects".

On the flip-side of that coin is the question: Why didn't the PLP give these projects the green light to go ahead before being turned out of office? According to their logic, the Bahamas would have had a booming economy if their projects had gone ahead. So what went wrong? Why did they drag their feet when they neared the finish line? If all of these projects had been buzzing ahead when the FNM became the government, then Bahamians would have been working. But, no, for some reason, there were contracts that just needed a signature to get them started. It was left to the FNM on coming to office to complete the paper work, put the shovel in the ground, and move them on.

The investments that did not go ahead had nothing to do with any FNM "stop, review and cancel" programme, but rather with the Lehman Brothers collapse in 2008, leaving many investors strapped for cash. Several of these investments bit the dust because of this - the GINN project in Freeport eventually being one of them. The Ritz Carlton hotel for Rose Island was another stalled investment that never got off the drawing board. As was Royal Island near Spanish Wells, a Marriott Hotel and the Rockford Lighthouse Point project in Eleuthera. All this because investment cash had dried up -- nothing to do with the Ingraham government.

Apparently, the Urgo Hotels continue discussions with a view to moving forward in Eleuthera.
We recall the night many years ago when the late Prime Minister Sir Lynden Pindling stood on a platform in Freeport and laughed at Hubert Ingraham's humble beginnings, dismissing him as merely a "delivery boy".

Immediately, The Tribune picked up the slight and turned it into a triumph. Aha! we chortled. That is just what the Bahamas has been waiting for -- a delivery boy. And we predicted that this was one delivery boy who would deliver. And, by Jove, he did. Even now, Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham has had to deliver many of the investment plans that were left unsigned on prime minister Perry Christie's desk when he was voted from office.

In a statement in the House shortly afterwards, Prime Minister Ingraham said the Christie government had claimed it had brought $20 billion of direct foreign investment into the country during its five years in office.

"We have looked for it," said Mr Ingraham, "but cannot find it."

He said his government found a number of Heads of Agreement completed for a number of projects by the Christie government, but it was the FNM that had to table several of them in the House. Mr Ingraham said that with the exception of the Phase III expansion of Kerzner International and a billion dollars in land sales to international persons (GINN, Kerzner and the Abaco Club), the FNM was unable to find the billions the PLP claimed it brought in.

Negotiations for a proposed development of a PGA Village in Cat Island was also in suspension when the PLP left office. The negotiations were completed by the FNM shortly after its return to office.

We understand that expectations were high that the project would move forward notwithstanding the economic downturn because its principals were very well funded. Mr Ingraham even attended a ground breaking ceremony in Cat Island. While planning and design work continues and some preliminary work commenced on the layout of the golf course, the project has not moved forward as expected.

And so when the PLP talk about projects stalled for review by the FNM government, the voter has to carefully examine the facts to find out exactly why they did not go ahead. They will soon learn that none of them was delayed or cancelled by the FNM.

February 24, 2012

tribune242 editorial

Caribbean Blog International

In a country like The Bahamas that is lax in enforcing its laws against illegal immigration, it is easy to see how this issue has spiraled out of control... ...In addition to enforcing its laws regarding deportation, the government must also implement more stern penalties to discourage Bahamians from hiring illegal immigrants

The immigration fiasco pt. 2

By By Arinthia S. Komolafe

The Latin phrase “Vox Populi, vox dei” when translated to English means that “the voice of the people is the voice of God”.  This phrase is commonly attributed to voting and was most notably used by Sir Lynden Pindling after conceding the Progressive Liberal Party’s defeat of the 1992 general election. Today, the same holds true; however, Bahamians ought to realize that their voices carry power not only during election time every five years, but at all times.  We must continue to discuss and encourage dialogue on matters of national interest in an attempt to influence and shape policy decisions.  Issues such as crime, education, healthcare, the diversification of our economy and immigration certainly stand out among others.

In my previous article, we explored the possible implementation of an amnesty program.  The merits of an amnesty program provide an incentive for undocumented immigrants to regularize their status, obtain temporary residence/work status or face immediate deportation in accordance with applicable Bahamian laws.  Further, once it is determined which individuals arrived in the country after a particular date, the government must make haste to deport such individuals back to their home countries immediately.  The primary obligation of any government is to protect its citizens and foster an environment in which its people can prosper.  It is imperative, therefore, for the government to make every effort to ascertain the number of illegal immigrants in the country, the skill-set of these individuals and how best they can contribute to the society.

Immigration, policy and the economy

An effective immigration policy in The Bahamas would be tied into the government’s education, investment and economic policies.  It is widely known that while Haitians are not the only demographic of individuals who constitute the illegal immigration population in The Bahamas, they make up the vast majority.  It is estimated that approximately 66 percent of Haitians in the Republic of Haiti work in the agriculture sector.  They are particularly engaged in subsistence farming, which contributes to about one third of Haiti’s gross domestic product.  During a hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 2010, former United States President Bill Clinton expressed his regret of having oversight of trade policies that caused the demise of Haiti’s rice farming during his term in office.  In what he termed a “devil’s bargain”, the U.S. forced Haiti to reduce tariffs on imported subsidized U.S. rice.  The demise of rice farming in Haiti has been attributed to the aforesaid policy and arguably hindered Haiti’s ability to become self-sufficient.  There is no doubt that this policy has also had a direct and negative impact on The Bahamas and other developing countries within the region that are not self-sufficient today.  Indirectly, it can be argued that this policy also contributed to the increased migration of Haitian nationals to The Bahamas in search of economic security.

Bahamians understanding the fragility of the cyclical tourism and financial services industries have been advocating for years that the government provide more incentives for the development of the agricultural sector in an attempt to expand the industry and diversify our economy.  An expansion of the agricultural sector can provide thousands of jobs and move us toward self-sufficiency and some form of food security.  However, the widely held perception is that Bahamians are unlikely to engage in agriculture on a grand scale.  While that may or may not be true, what is clear is that we can utilize the skills of Haitian migrants present in the country to develop the agriculture industry.  If two out of three Haitians are engaged in farming, it follows then that this expertise should be in The Bahamas.  A thriving agriculture industry can reduce our balance of trade deficit by reducing food imports and creating greater opportunities for exports.

Granting temporary work permits under a properly planned amnesty program for illegal immigrants can to a great extent ease the burden these individuals place on the public purse.  This no doubt currently drains our resources in areas such as education and healthcare without a substantial contribution to the Bahamian economy.  It is well-known that immigrants remit most of their funds to their home countries to assist their families back at home.  As a result, very little of what is made by the immigrant worker is spent within the Bahamian economy.  The implementation of a value-added or sales tax would assist in an immigrant worker’s contribution to government revenue in addition to work permit fees and national insurance contributions.

Added resources

It would be an understatement to remark that Bahamian employers play a major role in the illegal immigration problem that exists in the country today.  Driven by the need to pay reduced wages to maximize profits and minimize expenses, many are inclined to hire an immigrant lacking the necessary documentation to engage in gainful occupation.  Economic immigrants usually weigh the cost of traveling to a country and being able to find work against being apprehended by the authorities. In a country like The Bahamas that is lax in enforcing its laws against illegal immigration, it is easy to see how this issue has spiraled out of control.  In addition to enforcing its laws regarding deportation, the government must also implement more stern penalties to discourage Bahamians from hiring illegal immigrants.  In France for example, the law prohibits the entry or irregular stay of an illegal immigrant.  If a French citizen is found guilty of harboring such individuals, they can face up to five years in prison and be fined €30,000.  The low-tolerance French government has also gone as far as implementing quotas to combat smugglers who profit financially from moving immigrants into, through and out of France.

The government must strengthen its patrols to minimize the entry of illegal immigrants to our shores.  More of the annual budget should be dedicated to providing the necessary resources to aid the Royal Bahamas Defence Force in its attempt to eradicate illegal activities on the perimeters of our borders.

Many have suggested that bases on our southern islands collectively known as MICAL can help to mitigate some of the problems we currently face in this regard.  The problem of illegal immigration is not unique to The Bahamas.  Hence, we must keep discussions on this issue going and learn from the mistakes and successes of other nations.  We need not reinvent the wheel but must conduct detailed research with a view to implementing a robust immigration policy.

 

Arinthia S. Komolafe is an attorney-at-law.  Comments can be directed at: arinthia.komolafe@komolafelaw.com

Feb 23, 2012

The immigration fiasco pt. 1

thenassauguardian

Fred Mitchell's Blood libel paints the Bahamian political scene and the 2012 general election in The Bahamas Red

An outrageous and bizarre statement

thenassauguardian editorial

Last week Leader of Government Business in the Senate Dion Foulkes disclosed in the Senate a secret cable from the U.S. Embassy in Nassau appearing on the WikiLeaks website.

The cable included allegations from a public officer in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs alleging that then Minister of Foreign Affairs Fred Mitchell was involved in a scheme to sell visas to Chinese nationals.

Foulkes tabled the cable after being asked to do so by Leader of Opposition Business in the Senate Allyson Maynard-Gibson.

Following the disclosure and tabling of the cable, Mitchell, the shadow minister of foreign affairs for the official opposition, described Foulkes’ actions as a new low in Bahamian politics.

Bahamians can judge for themselves what they think of Foulkes’ decision to disclose the cable.  We have observed Bahamian politics for many years.  We were also the original publisher of the WikiLeaks cables in The Bahamas.  Our series of stories reporting on these cables can be found on The Nassau Guardian’s website.

Given what we have observed over many years and as well as our decision to publish the WikiLeaks cables, we do not believe that their disclosure in the political arena is in itself problematic in terms of matters of policy and governance.  We would abhor the use of the cables to attack the personal lives of political figures.

What we do believe is a low point and way beyond the pale is comments made by Mitchell in response to Foulkes’ disclosure.  We reported those comments in detail in last Friday’s paper.

Mitchell stated: “I am now before the Bahamian people with clear eyes and I want them to see the whites of my eyes.  What Dion Foulkes has done is a blood libel from which there can be no coming back.”

Mitchell continued: “This blood libel by you [Dion Foulkes] has now set enmity between me and your house.  I take it personally and will deal with you accordingly.  There will be no retreat and no surrender.  You can take that to the bank.”

Mitchell’s comments are not only a low point.  They are bizarre.  They have no place in political discourse.  They have violent connotations.

The term “blood libel” has a particular and terrible history.  It refers to the obscene accusation that a particular group murders others in order to use their blood for various rituals.  Often, the alleged victims are children.

What exactly does Mitchell mean when he says there will be enmity between his house and that of Foulkes?  Is Mitchell threatening violence?  Might this be a matter for the Royal Bahamas Police Force to investigate?

Mitchell should retract various elements of his remarks.  He should apologize to Foulkes.  Failure to do either of these will result in Mitchell doing permanent damage to his credibility.

The opposition must distance itself from Mitchell’s dangerous remarks.  The leader of the opposition should warn Mitchell that there is no place in our politics for talk of “blood libel” and “enmity between me and your house”.

Feb 21, 2012

thenassauguardian editorial

Caribbean Blog International

In The Bahamas, it seems, if the police have "strong reasons" to believe you are guilty of trespassing, or noise pollution, or vagrancy, you are sure to be placed under arrest... ...But if you perpetrate an illegal scheme that has immense diplomatic and national security consequences for the entire country, well that's OK

THE REWARDS OF CORRUPTION


By PACO NUNEZ
Tribune News Editor


THE big story last week was obviously the back-and-forth claims of visa fraud between the two major parties.

First, FNM Senator Dion Foulkes told of a Foreign Affairs officer who claimed her former boss, Fox Hill MP Fred Mitchell, tried to pressure staff into granting entry visas to 30 ineligible Chinese nationals. Denying the claims, Mr Mitchell produced a police report showing his accuser was herself suspected of issuing visas in return for cash.

There was nothing particularly new in any of this - the claims against Mr Mitchell were published online months ago by Wikileaks, while the visa-for-cash investigation made headlines in 2005.

What the public should sit up and take notice of, however, are recommendations in the police report released by Mr Mitchell.

The targets of the investigation were suspected of selling entry visas to Haitian nationals at $1,500 a pop.

No one knows how many documents were illegally issued, but the racket is said to have involved a fleet of boats that ferried passports, some of which turned out to be forgeries, to and from Haiti. The scam was also thought to have made use of aircraft implicated in drug and human trafficking operations.

In the end, investigators decided there were "strong reasons to conclude" that certain employees were involved in "corrupt and unethical practices" at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Their recommendations? Safeguards should be put in place, staff should be periodically rotated, and those thought to be involved should be transferred or reassigned.

Reassigned?

A group of civil servants are thought to have enriched themselves by helping untold numbers of illegal immigrants enter the country, some bearing fake passports, on flights operated by known drug and human smugglers, and the police believe they should remain on the public payroll?

In the Bahamas, it seems, if the police have "strong reasons" to believe you are guilty of trespassing, or noise pollution, or vagrancy, you are sure to be placed under arrest. But if you perpetrate an illegal scheme that has immense diplomatic and national security consequences for the entire country, well that's OK.

It is hard to imagine a plausible justification for this. The police might say they found insufficient evidence to charge anyone. But in that case, they have to explain why they recommended anyone be transferred or reassigned in the first place.

And since when does a lack of conclusive evidence stop investigating officers in their tracks? Surely strong suspicions should be followed up with warrant requests, arrests, raids, interrogations, and so on.

What's more, according to the report this was an undercover investigation. Are we to believe the police's mole saw enough to have "strong suspicions" about a number of employees, but did not come across a single shred of hard evidence?

The report claims an undercover agent saw a ministry official and a Haitian man suspected of being a passport mule "in the stairway exchanging documents for what appeared to be cash. He returned in the evening to the Ministry at the back door and collected the processed documents."
Shortly thereafter, the report says, the man was seen "distributing the passports to Haitian nationals who were waiting in the parking lot at Market Street."

Surely this is enough circumstantial evidence to make a few arrests.

Critics of the PLP will conclude from all this that the investigation, which took place during the Christie administration, was never intended to have any real teeth.

Indeed, it reeks of a "commissioned" report, requested by the government for future use in just such a mud-slinging contest as the one that took place last week.

But we should pause before condemning the PLP alone.

What about the Ministry of Education staff who were caught red-handed stealing classroom supplies and furniture just last year?

They were all arrested and removed from their jobs, but formal charges were never filed, and a few months later they were back at the ministry in different positions.

Some of them, according to well placed sources, were even appointed to the team managing an $11.8 million loan from the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). Talk about letting the hand into the cookie jar.

There are also long-standing allegations of kickback schemes that permeate the entire ministry. These too have been the subject of investigations, but the most that ever came of it was a few forced early retirements. Full benefits, of course.

And then there is the Ministry of Housing scandal. It is claimed that thousands of dollars in bogus fees were added to the cost of houses under the last PLP government, leading to a multi-million dollar payout to the perpetrators.

The Christie government said it caused an investigation to be launched, but of course found no wrongdoing. And as the FNM's first term back in office draws to a close, the Attorney General's Office has yet to bring anyone before the courts - despite the fact that police recommended at least six people be charged as far back as 2008.

This would all be laughable if it weren't so tragic. In these two cases, let us not forget, the victims are school children and low-income families.

The reasons behind the reluctance of politicians to punish public service corruption are clear.
Whichever party is in charge at a given time is interested in keeping hold of power, and doesn't want any major scandals on their watch, no matter who is responsible.

The public service is also a huge source of support for both major parties, and huge shake-ups that end with people going to jail will probably mess with established voting trends.

But what about the police? Calculations based on image and reputation are all fine and good for politicians, but have no place in law enforcement, right?

Wrong, according to the visa scandal investigators, who wrote in their report that: "At this stage, whether something can be done or not in terms of a criminal investigation and prosecution cannot supersede the need to prevent further damage to the image and reputation of the Ministry..."

And here I was thinking the police's job was to bust law breakers and let the chips fall where they may.

What do you think?

* Email pnunez@tribunemedia.net with your comments, or visit www.tribune242/insight to join in the online conversation.

February 20, 2012

tribune242

Caribbean Blog International