The attempt by some to skilfully divert the public's glare in the Mary King ignominy unto Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar is somewhat surprising. Had the Prime Minister not acted as expeditiously and authoritatively as she did, she would have surely unearthed the wrath of her political detractors.
Unfortunately, her prompt and affirmative response has not daunted proponents of the "go after Kamla campaign".
Former senator King's immediate reaction to the revocation of her appointment is reported to have been one of astonishment that the Prime Minister had acted so swiftly and had not awaited a report from the Integrity Commission. Such a response is more than amusing.
Unfortunately, her prompt and affirmative response has not daunted proponents of the "go after Kamla campaign".
Former senator King's immediate reaction to the revocation of her appointment is reported to have been one of astonishment that the Prime Minister had acted so swiftly and had not awaited a report from the Integrity Commission. Such a response is more than amusing.
When on May 28, 2010, Mary King took the oath of office administered by his Excellency the President, she was acutely aware that her senatorial and ministerial appointments to the Cabinet were made by the Prime Minister and not by the Integrity Commission.
Prime Minister Bissessar then did not seek the intervention of the Integrity Commission in King's appointment and was similarly under no obligation to be guided by them in the instant revocation.
A ministerial appointment and revocation thereof is solely within the purview of the Prime Minister. Section 75 (2) of the Constitution of the Republic states, "the Cabinet shall consist of the Prime Minister and such number of other Ministers... as the Prime Minister may consider appropriate".
The Integrity Commission, on the other hand, is a separate constitutional entity with a distinct legal remit set out, in part, in Section 138 (2) (d) as being "the monitoring and investigating of conduct, practices and procedures which are dishonest or corrupt".
The Prime Minister's decision in this matter, guided by an opinion by the Attorney General, appears proper, reasonable and fair on all counts.
This was a matter of public interest and it is the Attorney General who is the guardian of the public interest acting independently in a quasi-judicial capacity.
That Mrs King had forwarded a certain response to the allegations made against her and which formed part of the Attorney General's opinion gives the impression that the process was fair.
The nation must remind itself of Executive inaction, which created a runaway Urban Development Corporation of Trinidad and Tobago Ltd, and of the then Prime Minister's silence on serious allegations of conflict of interest involving his Minister of Finance and CLICO.
The revocation of Senator King's appointment is an assurance to the people that Prime Minister Persad-Bissessar is committed to good, fair, transparent and accountable governance.
The King revocation reinforced the Prime Minister's commitment to integrity in public life and to the rule of law. The Prime Minister must be commended for taking positive command of this matter as quickly as she did.
Mere days before her first anniversary in office, the Prime Minister proved to the nation that the public interest was more important than public relations currency gained from political milestones.
Ashvani Mahabir | Chaguanas
No comments:
Post a Comment