Mac seeks to oust CoP and officials from ACC
McKeeva Bush, Leader of the Opposition
(CNS): The opposition leader has filed what could prove to be another controversial private member’s motion in the Legislative Assembly, requesting not just the removal of the commissioner of police (CoP) from the Anti-Corruption Commission but the complaints commissioner and the auditor general as well to create an entirely independent body. The motion is similar to one filed by the independent member for North Side, Ezzard Miller, and broadly accepted by McKeeva Bush when he was premier in 2011.
However, Bush told CNS Wednesday that the authorities never addressed the issue and he is pressing for the change now. At the time of the motion, Bush, although leader of the country, did not have the constitutional responsibility for the corruption commission and it would have been down to the deputy governor and the attorney general to lead the necessary changes to the law.
The question of the police commissioner being chair of the constitutional body is one that has been raised by many people in and out of the political arena. It continues to cause concern as speculation about police corruption continues, and with no independent police complaints authority, the RCIPS’ own internal investigation processes remain far from transparent. Although a number of lower ranking officers have faced corruption charges, no officer has ever been jailed, even in the face of convictions.
David Baines, RCIPS Commissioner of Police
Bush said that alongside the CoP, he believes the complaints commissioner and the auditor general are also conflicted. He said the high-ranking public officials are in a position to point the finger or make accusations regarding corruption in the first place as a result of their jobs. He said it is therefore not right that if they make the allegations, they are also charged with heading the body that would direct the RCIPS Anti-Corruption Unit’s investigations.
“I believe it is against natural justice and presents a conflict as they are the ones who decide who should be investigated. We need a truly independent commission,” the opposition leader said.
The motion was filed with the Legislative Assembly on Wednesday afternoon but it is not clear if it will make the order paper for the upcoming meeting which opens next Friday, once government has dealt with the Budget
It joins a particularly controversial motion which was filed last month concerning Bush’s misconduct trial last year calling for an independent investigation into what he has said was a conspiracy to oust him from office.
That motion implicates the current premier in the alleged conspiracy and led to Alden McLaughlin demanding a public apology from the opposition leader. But when Bush missed last Friday’s deadline to retract comments made in the motion and at a press briefing, McLaughlin confirmed that he had instructed his attorneys to file suit against Bush.
If an action is filed, then it is understood the motion will not be debated in the LA as it would become sub judice. But the opposition leader confirmed Wednesday that he is not withdrawing that motion and is waiting to see what the premier does regarding his threatened legal action. Bush also said he was discussing with his legal advisors whether or not that motion would in fact be subject to the contempt laws.
Bush had filed the motion calling on government to establish an independent enquiry into how he was treated over the casino credit card scandal. He was hoping to use the parliamentary privilege to protect him from legal issues in connection with the UK and FCO as a result of documents he claims to have, which may have public immunity protection relating to his case that he wants to expose.
However, having also accused the premier, who has denied any involvement in any conspiracy, the original motion is currently in legal limbo.
The latest motion (below) is unrelated but it could present an opportunity for Bush to reveal what he says are damning documents implicating Police Commissioner David Baines and Auditor General Alastair Swarbrick in his downfall.
The motion implies that Bush has evidence that there is a serious conflict of interest in their membership, as he requests government makes the necessary change to the anti-corruption law.
McKeeva Bush’s private member’s motion Anti-corruption law amendment May 2015
the same mistake over and over
What a joke and waste of time .
Selfish bunch of men run this bankrupt island ..
Everyday I laugh,when what is new to your leaders is 20 years old….
80% of the current administration should just quit
if you really love your country
Very simple really. They put in the best people they have to pick from. That’s what they ended up with. Same as the Caymanian people. They ended up with Bush and Alden. The Anti- corruption Commission got proven, dependable, competent, experienced, and They all can read and write.
let me guess the new corruption committee will be headed up by Bush and his cronies
~ Our good, brave, honest police officers and agents with integrity deserve not only better training and standards, but leaders that lead by good example in their agencies for their officers to follow. It is up to the management to weed out the bad apples and when one of their own breaks the law or their own code of conduct or ethics, or even a mistake, it is their superiors that have to take responsibility and hold them accountable. The lives of all law enforcement officers are in their care. As are the lives of the public. People want the Truth.
~ Bad cops lie, falsify reports, plant evidence, use excessive force, flat out lie under oath in a court of law. And never even blink.
~ And good ones sometimes feel like they have to also and break their own code of ethics and conduct to cover for the bad ones. Or otherwise be labeled a rat and face retaliation. If any officer breaks the Law, Code of Conduct or Ethics, he should not be shielded by the Police Bill of Rights.
~ What is more concerning and a national security threat, is what the bad apples do off duty, or on duty but off camera……………….?
~ Yes, polygraphs can be beat. Yes, the are inadmissable in court. Yes, they are only as good as the examiner. But if used as a tool to weed out the bad apples, and protect the good cops, maybe they would think twice before breaking the very laws they were sworn to uphold.
~ All Levels of Law Enforcement have for decades felt that the polygraph is a much needed and essencial part of the hiring process. Why not change Policy that Polygraphs and Psych Evals for new Hires expire every 5yrs? (Including applicants for higher ranking positions)
~ National Institute of Ethics: Police Code of Silence – Facts Revealed http://www.aele.org/loscode2000.html
~ Police Corruption and Misconduct legal definition http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Police+Corruption+and…
~ National Instititute of Justice: Police Discipline: A Case for Change http://www.nij.gov/publications/pages/publication-detail.aspx?ncjnu…
~ The Cato Institute’s National Police Misconduct Reporting Project http://www.policemisconduct.net/
~ Police Misconduct and ‘Law Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights’ Laws | Cato @ Liberty http://www.cato.org/blog/police-misconduct-law-enforcement-officers…
~ Center for Investigative Reporting ~ “Crossing the line: Corruption at the border” – http://bordercorruption.apps.cironline.org/
~ DoD: Random Lie-Detector Tests Increase Personnel Security https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/dod-random-lie-detector-tests-incre… (“the polygraph is the single most effective tool for finding information people were trying to hide.”)
~ Federal, State and Local Governments (including police) are excluded from the Polygraph Act of 1988. http://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/whdfs36.htm
~ Break the Code. Break the Culture.
For anyone who might be slightly perplexed, here is the answer to your question:
McKeeva’s motion concerning Alden, the Chief of Police, Foreign and Commonwealth Office and others cannot be debated in LA while Alden has him in court for what he said during his press announcement on the motion. But everybody knows McKeeva, so this is basically another attempt to debate the same issue under a different title.
….while I am NOT a supporter of the UDP, I am in complete agreement in this regard. How can there be transparency if members of the committee is directly conflicting? Changes need to be made and if there’s no hidden agendas, then those individuals should gladly step aside, not having any control or say in who is appointed to take their place either! I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again…. the PPM/UDP/C4C and independent members need to put their heads together and work in unity in order for this country to move forward! Stop pointing fingers at one another and picking fights in the LA like school children. You each said you wanted us to vote for you “we did” and you promised to do what was best for the sake of our people and our country….so DO IT! We’re still waiting to see you all working together and not allowing what party you belong to restrict you from doing the right thing because some one else came up witht the idea first and someone from a party other than yours made the suggestion. Man up and STAND UP! Stop being petty! There are so many very important matters that our country are faced with right now and require the intelligent men and women as our representatives to focus and brain storm together to determine the right solutions. The outcome can be favourable, however there are so many distractions that can cause a wrong move or decision that could be detrimental to us and generations to come. In order to live in love and unity you must first seek God and ask for HIS guidance and forgiveness. So to our polititians I say “apologies must come, handshakes must now take the place of hard feelings and harsh words”. It is not too late to turn this country around in a positive way but we are down to the wire, the world is looking on and writing notes. Close the loop holes and make the LA the force it was meant to be “strong and united”.
This has the potential to get VERY I N T E R E S T I N G – if Mac plays the ace card. Some people gonna be lookin for ‘Depends’. I can’t wait.
Could we appoint Mr Stan Thomas as a member of this committee? Just so we could get an honest explanation of what the $750,000.00 was for.
And replace them with…Rolston and Capt Eugene?
After 30+ years in the LA McKeeva finally comes up with a motion that makes sense. Now we just have to make sure that they are not replaced with a jury of his peers.
Pardon me, but I am sure Ezzard and Arden brought this same motion to the LA when Mac was Premier and could have done something about it and he did nothing. But now it is a good idea, Sorry looks like REVENGE to me, against the COP and the AG for doing their jobs.
Maybe is you read the article once you more you may just see that it mentions Ezzard and Arden bringing this same motion to the LA when Mac was premier. It also goes on to say, “At the time of the motion, Bush, although leader of the country, did not have the constitutional responsibility for the corruption commission and it would have been down to the deputy governor and the attorney general to lead the necessary changes to the law.”
2.02 maybe is you write de Engleesh, maybe we is appreciating it
This seems to be a righteous motion brought by Mac. Too bad many will see it as just another deflective move by Mac to distract us from his other nonsense. Here’s hoping Alden takes him to the wire on this other matter.
Hate to admit it but he could have a valid point here. The ACC was a joke from day one with at least two members of the panel clearly working for the Governor and therefore answerable to the FCO rather than anyone in the Cayman Islands.
Whether this has any bearing on the other matters he’s raising is debateable but the concept of the ACC has always ranked with Operation Tempura and RCIPS ‘Professional Standards’ Unit when it comes to credibility.
I hate to admit it but he might have a point here. The CoP works to the bidding of the Governor and, based on what happened to Dan Duguay, the Auditor General has to be very careful about what decisions he makes. If that doesn’t raise conflicts I’d be very surprised.
As for the OCC? Nicola Williams parting comments indicated very clear dis-satisfaction with the way that organisation is regarded by CIG.
Yes, convenient excuse to getting rid of all who criticize him. I might agree on the anti corruption but not when it comes from the morally corrupt. Can they counterfile to get rid of the opposition leader?