The Tribune

PROGRESSIVE Liberal Party leader Philip “Brave” Davis has criticised the government’s Freedom of Information Commissioner appointment, complaining that he was not consulted as the law requires.

He also expressed disapproval of the government’s choice, retired Supreme Court Justice Keith Thompson, questioning his ability to be impartial.

The government recently announced the appointment of Mr Thompson and Shane Miller, a retired assistant director of legal affairs, as Deputy Commissioner.

“I was totally surprised by the announcement and that surprise is rooted in the fact that no lawful appointment of the Information Commissioner could have been made without consultation with me,” Mr Davis said.

“The law says that that appointment has to be made by the Governor General after the recommendation of the Prime Minister after consultation with the leader of the opposition. I’ve not been consulted on that appointment. Insofar as the Deputy Commissioner is concerned, that appointment seems to have been simultaneous. Well again, the law requires the Information Commissioner to make that recommendation. We don’t know who made that recommendation so as far as I can see, the whole process was contrary to law.

“The appointments were contrary to law because I have not been consulted and I’m concerned about the fact that the Deputy Commissioner was appointed and that appointment was to be made by the Commissioner.”

Asked about the choices, Mr Davis said: “I’m concerned about the capacity of these persons because one of the qualifications includes having some familiarity with accessing information and I don’t know that either of these persons have any of those qualifications. And again, the independence of the person they deem to be the Commissioner is questionable in my view.”

During the press conference announcing the commissioners, officials said it will take six months to consult as to how the Freedom of Information Act will be rolled out and how the FOIA office will operate.

Mr Davis said in response: “Are they not putting the cart before the horse? Should they not have engaged these consultants before they move to appoint a Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner? Should they not have had this agency interview persons for the post? And the question is how did they arrive at the appointments that they have made? How many persons applied for the posts and how do we compare the resumés of these persons?”