The Tribune

By AVA TURNQUEST

Tribune Chief Reporter

aturnquest@tribunemedia.net

OPTHALMOLOGIST Dr Jonathon Rodgers told a conference at the College of The Bahamas on Friday that citizens should utilise the judicial review process to increase government accountability on public disclosures.

Dr Rodgers, who has written two books on the Bahamian economy, stressed that the country was in a state of political decay with zero institutional accountability because of the government’s failure to enforce laws and the public’s inaction.

He pinpointed a legal recourse to Parliament’s disregard for public disclosure laws as a panellist at the conference on the Future of Democracy,

The academic community explored themes of governance, civil society, politics and social discourse within the context of democracy at the two-day event hosted by COB’s Schools of English and Social Sciences.

“Over the past ten years,” Dr Rodgers said, “only two of 38 members have filed on a regular basis. Seemingly the disclosures committee has not detected or investigated any anomalies even though there have been many a parliamentarian who has entered the political arena as a pauper and exited with untold riches. What can the public do to hold parliamentarians accountable?”

Financial disclosures must be turned into the Public Disclosures Commission (PDC) by March each year.

Last month, it was revealed by The Tribune that at least 13 members of parliament had failed to meet the deadline. According to the Public Disclosures Act, a summary of the declarations shall be published in the Gazette and any person who does not comply with the law is liable to a fine not exceeding $10,000 or imprisonment of not more than two years.

Dr Rodgers said: “Judicial review process, any citizen can ask the courts for a judicial review of the decision of the disclosures committee not to investigate any irregularities and substantially the Prime Minister’s decision not to engage the Attorney General to take action against delinquent parliamentarians. However, the discretionary powers of any Prime Minister, as it pertains to the act, does not give him the right to act in an unreasonable or irrational manner.”

On the matter of disclosures, Dr Rodgers said successive heads of state have not acted reasonably or rationally, and such disregard would have been found guilty of “abject dereliction of duty and a gross violation of parliamentary code of conduct” in the United Kingdom.

Dr Rodgers explained there were several remedies once a judicial review has commenced, such as a declaration, mandamus or prohibition from the judge.

“A judge would have to declare that the majority did not file or fraudulently filed. A mandamus would follow, and penalties associated with the act would then have to be enforced. If a judge chooses to grant the third, prohibition, parliamentarians would step down because they would be considered no longer fit and proper to hold office had they broken the law.”