File fiasco lessons

THE MOST important takeaway from the missing file report isn’t about the Ministry of the Attorney General’s systems. It’s about the crucial need for good governance and accountability.

Attorney General Reginald Armour, SC, finally released the investigative report compiled by former Justice of Appeal Stanley John and retired assistant commissioner of police Pamela Schullera-Hinds in the Senate on January 21, after refusing to do so.

Far from being the fruit of a “sinister” effort in which the case file in relation to a malicious prosecution lawsuit was “caused to disappear” – as Mr Armour had in 2023 told the country was possibly behind the fiasco of a $20 million judgement in default – the probers made no findings of criminal conduct or fraud. They established no disciplinary offences. No one person was seemingly to blame.

But the investigators concluded “the necessary steps were not taken” to get a duplicate file.

In explaining why he had declined to release such findings, Mr Armour said he feared his office becoming involved in litigation, a matter which he suggested would have “negatively impacted” his goal of passing new law to achieve reform.

We find this highly unpersuasive.

It cannot be that theoretical litigation down the road in relation to the tabling of a report – which could be redacted – under the cover of parliamentary privilege somehow impairs a government’s prerogative to bring law.

Further, by Mr Armour’s own admission, the law that was eventually passed to address the systemic issues deemed relevant in this missing file case was premised on a separate 2008 report and its recommendations.

If both reports were, in fact, relevant, then lack of disclosure of one was to the detriment of legislators who voted on the Miscellaneous Provisions (Judicial and Legal Service) Act 2024 in September.

Or is it that what really led to his change of heart was the threat of freedom of information applications?

Did the fact that some officials involved have since been subject to high appointments play a role in the delay?

Behind all this is the profound tragedy of, first, a woman’s gruesome murder in 2007, and then, over nine years, the imprisonment and acquittal of a group of men.

The immense public outcry over a $20 million award for damages in their malicious prosecution lawsuit came amid intense anxiety about crime and the criminal justice system.

It is now undeniable the John probe, which cost about $500,000, simply kicked the can down the road.

But if the rule of law matters, there needs to be less political expediency and more responsibility in the AG’s office. And there needs to be greater efficiency in the systems there, too.

Unfortunately, neither seems forthcoming any time soon.