Contempt of integrity requirements?

The elected and selected politicians and representatives of constituencies listed by the Integrity Commission who have failed to file the required declarations of assets and income should consider the larger impact of forcing the commission to pursue legal action to ensure compliance.

The Integrity in Public Life Act has been law in TT since 1988, and for every decade of its existence, has been snubbed by an unseemly number of public officials who seem content to show up, then leave their roles, without respecting this fundamental aspect of accountability in governance.

Eighteen current and recent government MPs and senators are listed, ignobly outnumbering their Opposition counterparts by a count of eleven. This is not a competition that either side of the House should take pride in participating in.

Appallingly, today’s situation is an improvement on the recent past. In June 2019, the commission threatened to publicly name and shame 841 non-compliant people in public life.

The next step was legal action. The commission filed 150 ex-parte orders with the High Court in September 2021 to compel greater compliance.

It was the second time legal action had been taken. The first 23 ex-parte orders yielded just 11 instances of compliance. It was an overdue step in moving from moral persuasion in a matter that is classified as an offence under law carrying a fine of $250,000 and ten years imprisonment.

Senior members of government, including Energy Minister Stuart Young and Education Minister Nyan Gadsby-Dolly, should reflect on the message that this sends to the wider public, the suggestion that it’s okay to show up for the job while ignoring their responsibility to function transparently in service to the public.

Regrettably, the Integrity Commission has not been a standard bearer in governance as a reporting agency either. Given the responsibility for gathering, evaluating and holding in safekeeping the personal financial information of the most senior personalities active in governance, it has not inspired confidence in its management of its own affairs.

Chairman Rajendra Ramlogan reported frankly in the commission’s 2021 annual report on the internal challenges that the agency faces. During 2021, Mr Ramlogan lamented instances of open insubordination and defiance of the chain of command and the resignation of the entire investigations unit over plans to introduce performance parameters.

This followed other problems the commission has faced in recent years, including political missteps by past commissioners and often confrontational face-offs between delinquent politicians and investigating officers. For their part officials in public life must more uniformly accept that transparency in finances is part of their accountability to the electorate they serve. The Integrity in Public Life Act is a critical component of that promise. Flouting it is not just poor example; it is an insult to civil order.