AFC calls on Govt for establishment of Integrity Commission

As time marches on without a functioning Integrity Commission in place, even the governing coalition’s minority partner, the Alliance For Change (AFC) has grown impatient with the slow pace of change.
At the conclusion of the National Executive Council (NEC) last weekend, the minority party demanded, in a statement, that the Integrity Commission be treated as a matter of national priority.

Noting that it remained fully committed to its role in the advancement of constitutional reform in Guyana, the AFC called for the establishment of the Integrity Commission by the Government – of which a number of its own members are a part.
Guyana Times International made contact with AFC executive and Public Telecommunications Minister Cathy Hughes. However, she declined to comment on the AFC’s role in the process. Calls to other AFC Ministers went unanswered.
The history of the Integrity Commission is a tempestuous one. In 1999, the previous Government had sworn in members to the Commission. But since the 2006 resignation of the Commission’s Chairman, Bishop Randolph George, the body has been headless.
In January 2016, Government used its one-seat parliamentary majority to turn down a motion tabled by the Opposition that would provide for all Members of Parliament (MPs) making public declarations of taxable income and all assets over the last 10 years to the Integrity Commission which would be released to the public.
The coalition had noted that it was not in favour of the public declaration, and would prefer to make such disclosures to the Integrity Commission instead. It had said that such a move would violate the privacy of members.
In defeating the motion, the Government MPs had proposed amendments to the motion for the National Assembly to support the enforcement of the legal requirement for all MPs to file their Income Tax returns and make declarations to the Integrity Commission.
However, that proposal was protested by the Opposition and eventually resulted in MP Juan Edghill calling for his motion to be withdrawn, arguing that the amendments significantly changed the intent of the original motion. But the coalition MPs declined the withdrawal request and at the end of the debate, succeeded in passing the amended motion. While there is no functioning Integrity Commission, a ministerial Code of Conduct was gazetted in June of this year. The Code of Conduct is made up of 11 Articles. Article One prohibits public officials from taking bribes, while Article Two focuses on discrimination.
Article Three prohibits public officials from accepting “any gift, benefit or advantage from anyone, (except) personal gifts from a relative or friend”. This provision, it states, does not apply to gifts received on behalf of the State.
Article Five states: “No public (official) shall use his or her official influence in support of any scheme or in furtherance of any contract or proposed contract or other matter in regard to which he or she has an interest.”
Article Six has provisions for ensuring confidentiality. It prohibits public officials from disclosing any information that is classified as privileged or confidential, to any unauthorised person. Article Seven prohibits officials from using public property such as money, equipment, supplies or services for unapproved purposes.
Article Nine prohibits public officials from accepting “lavish or frequent entertainment” from any person or entity that the Government has or may have dealings with. This, the Article notes, includes invitations to sporting events and concerts.
Article 10 prohibits officials from using their office in an improper manner for personal gain, while the final article forbids anyone in public life from having outside employment “except with the written consent of the relevant authority”.