Dominica Users Group WHY WE NEED A COMMISSION OF INQUIRY NOW!

Why We Need a Commission of  Inquiry Now 

By

Gabriel J. Christian, Esq.

On Carnival Tuesday, February 25, 1963 a fire erupted at the back of the
Mexican band on King George V Street in Roseau, Dominica. As a result of the
fire that day 19 Dominicans were wounded; three fatally. The three who died
because of the injuries sustained that day were Eddie Martin, George James
and Eric Shillingford. On 20th March 1963, Colonel Alec Lovelace,
Administrator of Dominica appointed E.L. St. Bernard as the Commissioner to lead
an inquiry into the events which transpired on that that tragic day. Forty
four years later, it was the Report of Inquiry in the 1963 Fire, which
provided the outline for the book, Death by Fire: The Explosive Story of the
1963 Carnival Tragedy by Irving W. Andre and Gabriel J. Christian. Absent the
factual rendition in that report, its lists of injured, the authors would
have had a near impossible task in trying to recreate the events which took
place that day. However, where there was established a process, of persons
being subpoenaed, placed under oath and cross examined, much light was shed
on what was a dark episode in our island’s history. Such adherence to rule
of law sought to consolidate trust in the organs of the state and grant
relief at a time of great public outcry over what was a combustible
controversy. Such a moment now confronts our nation again. We cannot do less than
the colonial administrators did where they sought to examine controversy and
resolve conflict. It is for that reason, that we need a commission of
inquiry to examine the issue of corruption in public office now afflicting our
government.
A Brief Outline of the Commission Inquiry and its Role in our History
I thought it appropriate to make the above point, so that we could
appreciate the importance of using the Commission of Inquiry as an instrument via
which to ensure that rule of law obtains. The commission of inquiry is part
of a cherished tradition born of our history rooted in British
jurisprudence. Derived from British practice, Royal Commissions have usually been
appointed by the sovereign (i.e. head of State) upon the advice and with the
consent of government to examine controversies and matters of great
importance to the country. The commissioner is usually an eminent retired jurist –
so chosen to remove that person from the pressures which would usually
constrain a serving civil servant, attorney general or police official. The
commissioner need not be a jurist, but would need to be a person with a degree
of expertise in the area under examination and an understanding of
pertinent law. The commissioner is usually empowered to call upon accountants,
lawyers, investigators and other resource persons who may assist him/her in the
execution of the terms of reference. The commissioner would take
statements under oath from witnesses, and may also hire skilled counsel to cross
examine witnesses in public, and on the record. Discovery of pertinent
documentation is usually part of the process and the final report would have an
appendix of all that which was examined, in support of its final
recommendation. The recommendation may include changes in the law, government policy
and – if need be – criminal prosecution of those who were found to have
broken the law.
Dominica has a long history of such commissions and they have done much to
cultivate a national belief in our being a law abiding society. In the
carnival of 1927 when the ban mauvay revelers assaulted and wounded Police
Chief William Leighton, a Commission was impaneled and persons prosecuted.
When the 1930 Carib War took place and lives were lost, a commission of
inquiry investigated. We now have a record of the 1963 Carnival Fire in the same
way, as mentioned above. While no one was prosecuted, the record made did
much to illuminate the event for posterity. After the Dominica Freedom Party
led opposition demonstrators invaded the House of Assembly on December 16,
1971 to prevent passage of a bill by the then Labour Party government, a
commission of inquiry was convened to examine the disturbances and punish
the offenders. A commission of inquiry into the Dominica Defence Force was
also conducted by a Colonel C.E. Martindale on August 17, 1978. So too, after
the May 29, 1979 Riot outside Government Headquarters in Roseau, a
similar panel was appointed. After the ascent of the Freedom Party to power, a
commission of inquiry was embodied to investigate whether there was fraud or
other wrong doing in the manner in which Pierre Charles was elected as
President of the National Youth Council (NYC) in that organization’s election
of 1977. I served under Justice Mathew on that commission as a token
representative of the left/Labour opposition. As a commissioner, we met at the
House of Assembly and took testimony of witnesses over several days, under
oath. Similarly, when allegations that the Freedom Party led by Eugenia
Charles bugged the United Workers Party headquarter a commission of inquiry was
summoned. Attorney Anthony Astaphan, on behalf of the government made a
name for himself during his cross examination of witnesses in that episode.
Surely, he remembers and should know the importance of such public inquiry
in resolving public controversy. Will he oppose this call now? If so, why?
The issue of the NYC election of 1977 and its operations – or the alleged
UWP Bugging Scandal had not risen to a level of national controversy – or
seriousness - as has the recent allegations of “Bin Bobol,” Ownership of
villas by Prime Minister Skerrit, or any of the related issues of corruption
in public office. Nonetheless, instituting commissions of inquiry was
deemed the right and proper thing to do. Why not now?
Settling the Society, Trust and the Public Mind
Since the election of December 18, 2009, I have remained silent with the
hope that the government would act with the requisite wisdom to settle the
public mind, and so squelch the nagging questions and mistrust which arose
during the campaign. Once an election is over it has been, and is, my
position that every Dominican must give his loyalty to the duly elected
government in doing what is necessary and lawful to build the nation. To that end I
complimented the government on the public works completed, such as the
refurbished airport and night landing capability. We have sought to work with
different ministries in areas of health, education and youth affairs.
Despite being maligned by the Pied Pipers of disinformation, The Dominica Academy
of Arts and Sciences (DAAS), of which I am a proud member, has not ceased
it pro development agenda and has consistently worked with government on
different levels and remains committed to doing so. DAAS President, Dr.
Clayton Shillingford’s championing of a partnership between the Dominica State
College (DSC) and the Smithsonian’s Museum is a sterling example of such
commitment to national development. Why would any conscious Dominican seek
to sever the good relations we have sought to forge with our homeland by
imputing improper motives to those who decry misconduct in high and low
places? Any misgiving aside, we must strive to applaud the good that government
does, while condemning deviant behavior. We cannot build where one opposes
government simply because one’s party is not in power. We cannot be consumed
by an all encompassing negativity which dulls productive effort. Even
where attacked, we must be wise in the rebuttal and persuade government to do
right by us. We know that many in government and the ruling party are honest
men and women who quietly support our efforts at a transparent and lawful
Dominican society. So we, those of us who favor balance, shall never engage
in any wholesale lambasting of government or a party when they have lost
their way. We seek to lead them away from any corruption of a kind that has
ruined mineral rich countries in Europe, Africa, Asia and closer to home.
All patriotic Dominicans have a duty to build the country and assist the
government. Such loyalty, however, does not extend to acquiescence in
wrong doing where, and if, it exist. It will not do to paint those who query
alleged misconduct as anti-government. Indeed, I am pro government; good
government, that is. Nor is this call anti-Labour Party, as I maintain a deep
commitment to the proud heritage of that movement which gave land to the
landless and hope to the hopeless. We, those of us who embarked on the
Dominica Diaspora in the Development Process Symposiums did much to support
government policy to the point, that our friends in the legitimate political
opposition considered us government agents. It is therefore ludicrous to now
disown our proven patriotism, simply because we oppose any misconduct, no
matter from which quarter, which trespasses upon the sanctity of integrity in
public service. We shall settle our society and hasten reconciliation where
we act in an open and transparent manner sufficient to infuse relations
between the governments and governed with trust. Right now, the trust which is
a prerequisite to our being united in the quest for development is
groaning under the weight of e-mails, documents and other evidence - some of it
now sworn testimony - which did not exist during the 2009 election campaign.
Public trust in rule of law on Dominica is at an all time low and slipping
fast; it is demoralizing and unsettles good faith attempts at national
concord. If our government, which is duty bound to serve our best interest,
has nothing to hide it should advise the President to appoint a commission
of inquiry now! That President Liverpool is by far the most lettered head of
state in our history should suggest that he knows well what should be
done. He must thus hasten to advise those who rule, that the nation is
threatened where no such accounting is done to set the ship of state right. Silence
on his part will not do.
Once a commission is in place, and where the government leaders at issue
are found to be without blame then they would be due an apology. I would
gladly step forward and do so; and would urge others to do likewise, where we
were shown to be somehow wrong all along. However, where the basis for
wrong doing is found, the law courts should be summoned to do their work.
Absent our adherence to the tradition of commissions of inquiry to examine mis
deeds and propose changes to preclude such misdeeds in the future, we shall
not be able to arrest the decline in public trust, the slide toward social
disorder and absence of a basis via which we can bring reconciliation to the
Dominican family. Such a commission will compel all those with evidence to
come forth. It will ask those in the know to state their piece in public
under oath. It will allow experts to determine whether the numerous e-mails
now in the public domain were doctored or are indeed legitimate. A
commission can reveal how the refunds in the Bin Purchase Scandal were accomplished,
and who were accomplices to any plot to fleece the treasury or convert
foreign aid to personal use. The commission’s reach will also extend to the
misty woods of Pennsylvania and be able to summon the silent government
procurement agent to state his piece and so clear his good name.
Appoint a Commission of Inquiry Now
We have just celebrated our 32nd anniversary of independence and it was
right that we did so. However, the country is uneasy; it is not at rest. If
there is nothing to hide, why the hesitation in moving forward with a proper
investigation? All of us know that conscious leadership in any democracy
worthy of the name would so act. In May 2009 Michael Martin, the Speaker of
the British Parliament, resigned over the issue of expenses by Members of
Parliament of public funds. He had sought to block disclosure of information
to the public of how certain British MPs were spending public funds. In
ruling against such attempts to deny the public such information, the high
court stated:
We have no doubt that the public interest is at stake. We are not here
dealing with idle gossip, or public curiosity about what in truth are
trivialities….The expenditure of public money through the payment of MPs’ salaries
and allowances is a matter of direct and reasonable interest to taxpayers.
Can we do less in Dominica? Is our system of jurisprudence not modeled on
the British common law? The decision by the British courts to hold their
MPs responsible to the governed was called a victory for transparency in
public office. What we hear on the airwaves in Dominica about corruption
today are not the idle allegations of political hacks dreamt up one morning by
talk show hosts intent on malice. We know Mr. Linton has his political
views at variance with the government and we have disagreed much over the
years, while finding common on matters of the national interest. As for Matt
Peltier, he was introduced to me by no less a person than Prime Minister Rosie
Douglas, of blessed memory. These men are not inherently anti-government
and both worked much to build bridges between Dominicans at home and
abroad. Where the work of investigative reporters such as Matt Peltier or Lennox
Linton has resulted in payment to the national treasury of tens of
thousands of dollars their efforts serve a public good. Shall we debase them or
honor them as civic heroes who protected the public till?
An atmosphere of innuendo, rumor, charge and counter-charge ruins the
public mood, saps the national vitality and causes many to be inattentive to
the real work of development. We must put an end to this, and resolve the
manner in a mature fashion with the available tools granted us by our history
as a nation groomed in the rule of law tradition. Where there is nothing to
hide, the summoning of such a commission of inquiry by those who purport
to lead us in the right path should be proceeded with immediately. As the
Integrity in Public Office Commission has been shown to be a toothless tiger,
unwilling to stir from its refuge; nothing less than a public commission
of inquiry will now do.

9 comments

  1. Re: WHY WE NEED A COMMISSION OF INQUIRY NOW!
    Gabriel J Christian Esq,

    A not surprising argument. You craft your language in condemnatory terms
    and tone, and premise your case on guilt, yet you cry out for a Commission
    to find the facts and truth? Or do you want a Commission merely to confirm
    your subjectively induced facts? In addition, you condemn the IPO Commission
    in the most derogatory of terms simply to find an excuse for your cry for a
    Commission, but when Sir Brian spoke of alleged bribery during the 2009
    election you hailed him as a judicial hero. Now he is no more than a
    toothless tiger. Also, you seem to forget that the UWP appointed members to
    the IPO Commission and one Member of the IPO Commission is the sister of the
    Leader of the DFP. More importantly, you ignore that the IPO is governed by
    statute, the rule of law and provisions of the Constitution, and not mepuis
    or scandal-mongering. As for the Director of Audit, I suppose as far as you
    are concerned, he is no more than fit for a garbage bin!

    BTW, I have appeared in at least three other Commissions of Inquiry in the
    OECS. Commissions are not appointed to fit the political fancy or game of
    any person or party. Recently, the High court of Antigua and Barbuda struck
    down a Commission of Inquiry as an abuse of State power and an attempt to
    interfere with the administration of justice. In any event, it is the
    Cabinet is vested with the substantive authority to decide on a Commission.
    Therefore, if the Cabinet decides that the allegations are baseless no
    Commission will be or should be appointed. The Parliament has made
    provisions for the IPO and if you refuse to invoke it, you do so at your
    peril. As for the villas are concerned, from what I hear you may soon be
    able to assist Mr. Linton and give evidence in search of the truth!Patience.

    Anthony W Astaphan,SC

  2. Re: WHY WE NEED A COMMISSION OF INQUIRY NOW!
    Gabe wrote;
    “Such a moment now confronts our nation again. We cannot do less than the
    colonial administrators did where they sought to examine controversy and
    resolve conflict. It is for that reason, that we need a commission of
    inquiry to examine the issue of corruption in public office now afflicting our
    government.”

    Gabe,
    In the spirit of reconciliation and putting closure to this
    ‘disheartening’ and ‘potentially’ destructive chapter in our history (currently being
    written), by public discontent, I concur. The Prime Minister is not obligated
    ‘by law’ to initiate a public inquiry, but in the interest of unification
    and ‘more importantly’, defusing a potential ‘powder keg’, it is the only
    logical course of action. I think the Prime Minister needs to overlook the
    hurt he feels (by the assertions levied against him), and let an inquiry
    proclaim his innocence. He does not have too by law, but my moral conviction he
    has nothing to loose and everything to gain.

  3. Re: WHY WE NEED A COMMISSION OF INQUIRY NOW!
    Gabrielle,

    Many..many thanks.. I could not not put it better. … Regardless of the
    persnal feelings by whoever, the principle sticks, too many accusations,
    allegations of public dealings using public office , it has to be cleaned
    up. The AG in Israel brought the sitting Prime Minister to and inquiry for
    wrong dealing, . Jean Chirac, Presidnet of France once he was out of office
    as President he was charged with corruption and wrong doing, when he was
    Mayor of Pariuis, 12 years earlier and was fined L5000,000.00 Euros.. the
    same standard and principle here…But our public officers/institutions do
    not have the balls to do so.. something is wrong, but we have to clean up
    this mess.
    Parry say, YOu , Gabo, PD, Shirley etc are all hell bent and are anti
    Skerit…what poor thinking.For the sake of country we will not be
    distracted…..

    God Bless youGabo..
    PD

  4. Re: WHY WE NEED A COMMISSION OF INQUIRY NOW!
    I want here to support Gabriel’s recommendation for the establishment of a
    Commission of Inquiry to look into the multiple allegations of wrong doing
    by Government

    I trust that the IPO Commission has taken note of the views of Gabriel here
    and many others who seek the public good.

    Clayton

  5. Re: WHY WE NEED A COMMISSION OF INQUIRY NOW!
    Gabe & PD.
    This is the ‘tone’ in communication that needs to be conveyed in our discussions regarding the Prime Minister. When we resort to name calling and personal attacks (as has been the case) their exist no incentive to accommodate. The Prime Minister has opted to be silence in the eyes of his critics (and for good reason); he has been personally attacked by many within, and this has lead to his ‘non compliant’ position in addressing these ‘assertions’ of corruption. The IPO has not seen it necessary and he will not stoop to the level of aggression to appease!
    I certainly would not have responded to the ‘assertions’ (had I been in his position), or dignify the ‘ignorant’ attacks levied at his person and position.
    Unlike many within, I do not think he is ‘evil’, as it has been suggested, and somewhat support his stance. Now that we are willing to be civil in our discourse during these discussions it may lead to a solution and resolution.

    It is now up to the Prime Minister to ‘lead by example’, not for the appeasement of his political critics, but for the good of our people and country. I hope he will consider the benefits to himself and our country and do that which is just, by putting closure (in the name of unity) to all these assertions of corruption.

  6. Re: WHY WE NEED A COMMISSION OF INQUIRY NOW!
    You are right Chris, tone is important and it is not about destroying each other but setting things right for the good of the nation.

    Very best regards

    Gabriel Christian, Esq.

  7. Re: WHY WE NEED A COMMISSION OF INQUIRY NOW!
    Chris,

    Enough has been said. Lennox Linton will be sued very early this week, maybe
    tomorrow hopefully. He will then have fund raisers hosted by Matt, Angelo
    Gabriel and Clayton. Shirley and Dobson ( whoever he is) will canvass the US
    and UK for resources to fight the evil empire.

    Also, the Linton and Q cabals chaired by the diasporian vanguard, and some
    local foot soldiers, will collate resources and line up to interview the 300
    or so witnesses anxious to give evidence, and provide witness statements
    themselves. The brilliant legal minds of Washington will provide their
    services in the public interest.

    Bear this in mind too Chris, a court of law is not a radio soap box! So when
    they beat their chests recall and remember their track record and many
    failures once the obligation to adduce evidence instead of bla bla bla and
    BS is imposed!

    I cannot predict or second guess the court, but this I know. The burden of
    proof is on the accuser and he must go in the witness box! And from what I
    heard of the last performance, which required the Judge( not magistrate) to
    intervene, someone will be in for a ride!

    God is good!

  8. Re: WHY WE NEED A COMMISSION OF INQUIRY NOW!
    Chris

    I share your sentiments entirely. The court case against Lennox Linton will
    bring out “the Facts” in a legal and therefore creditable setting. One
    sincerely hopes that the legal proceedings will ultimately bring an end to
    the vitriolic accusations one way or another, so that the increased
    divisiveness in Dominica that has been created by the constant attacks for
    more than a year now will finally come to a welcome end.

    Sincerely

    Parry R. Bellot

  9. Re: WHY WE NEED A COMMISSION OF INQUIRY NOW!
    The issue here is not about who is who, who is Dobson, etc, ? It is not
    about the messenger, but the message and the issue, just like was done and
    led by Counsel re the UWP. The same principle, the same concern for
    country, intergrity, stamp out corruption. During the campain led by Senior
    Cousel Many people were alleged of doing things and the credibility of those
    who lead it is in question because the story was made up as they moved on
    in the election campaign and as was siad it was Just to put perception in
    peoples mind. The campaign even went on to say that Earl Wiliams was failing
    his exam in Barbados and as Senior Counsel attributed then that it is all
    about “perception” , put in the face of these (dumb) Dominicans and they
    will buy it
    The story surfacing today which started some time ago is not about
    perception or made up, or to kick out goverenment. It is about credibility,
    how our government and its governmance wenty loose , without any checks and
    balances. It is NOT about Lennox Linton, but the country`s stability in that
    those who are coming into politics and governemnt will be warned and aware
    of the what it is to severe with loyally and and not to be deceptive and
    corrupt. The evidence is there in the tax evasion, the “mistake” scenario
    and gain I say if Lennox did not inverstigate and bring it out, it would
    not have been corrected. The abuise of public , openly given out before the
    election called “RED CLINIC”, how mucgh of our mnoney was given and who
    accounted, checked , how much was given and at the end of the day who took
    the balance and how much was trnasferred to Morne Bruce and Castle Comfort
    (where PM stayed for a while) where party loyals flocked and received hand
    outs cash like mad…… for Labour party and persnal gains.. Until these
    are dealth with, the perception wil remain m, becasue we do not have the
    final audited report before us. The Bin Bobol , if Lennox did not
    investigate and bring it out then we would not have and our treasury would
    not have been poorer or robbed of thousands of dollars. The question again
    is who took the money, where did it go.why did it take over 6 months to
    refund. I smell a RAT, a BIG RAT, don`t you all ?

    Also, why is it that it is Bubbles who is taking Linton to court and not the
    PM, what is going on?. Why all this protection for PM. What is going on?
    With all these past events, I believe that there is alot that we are not
    aware of. I do not feel that PM is a bad man, but My god, he is in public
    offcie, he is the PM and a high level of honesty, credibility is expected
    on him and I am convinced, since the Susan Oldie affair that these guys are
    inviolverd in deals, deals and more deals that we are yet to know of. A high
    ranking person of the labour party campaign team then said that the
    opposition was weak then re the Susan Oldie affair, and that the story is
    true…. but at some stage it will come out. So, it is not who PD is, or who
    is Shirley the question is who is Tony, besides hiding under the cloak of
    Senior Counsel..who realy is Tony, what is his real role..who does he
    represnent and defend so boldly and why, is it really Dominica? Does he
    really act in Dominicas interest(s).
    We need to clean up and restore some level of leadership, decency in our
    government, country and it is not personal or anti Skerrit, it is just Ma
    Domnik…..so please do not create stories and question the lotyalty of the
    whistle blowers in our country.
    Just like the priests (Fr Thomas) re Patrck John, in sermon, after sermon
    after sermon at Pottersville Catholic Church where he stuck to the issue
    and because of that he had to be protected, now Lennox needs his prawers
    and protection, he is being condemed.What is the diffrence, my God whay is
    the difference. Is it not eh the same God wishes that his people wre wel
    served and public m,oney is public and not to be stolen

    God Bless

    PD

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.