IN a letter to the Editor, the Attorney General seeks to rebut media censure on corruption:
THE EDITOR, Sir:
WHILST I am fully aware that the power of the media, in a democratic society, grants to the press the last word, always, I am obliged to issue a rejoinder to the editorial that appeared in your newspaper on Thursday, February 7, 2002.
For some time, I have been encouraging all elements and sectors of our society to take the utmost care in how we speak to and about each other, internally, and how we project ourselves, externally.
The Media Association of Jamaica, in collaboration with foreign entities, on Wednesday, had a seminar on Transparency and Corruption in Jamaica. I was invited to attend the seminar in order to advise on the progress toward the establishment of the Corruption Commission.
Since it was known that I myself would have been otherwise engaged, it was decided that the Solicitor-General, accompanied by at least one other attorney from the Attorney-General's Chambers, would attend to explain the present situation, and they did so.
The Solicitor-General not only attended and participated but also met, that same afternoon, with four of the participants from abroad, namely, Dr. Alastair Roberts, Dr. Richard Calland, Mr. Bertrand de Speville and Dr. Shelley McConnell with whom he had a wide-ranging discussion in relation to the Corruption legislation and the way forward.
Now, will you please explain to us, in light of the above, how it has come to pass that, in your editorial, you make the giant leap to conclude that: "Mr. A.J. Nicholson, the Minister of Justice, who is responsible for the operations of the Act made no appearance at a seminar yesterday, held to discuss the Act together with the Access Information Bill. By this action and by the delay in implementing the Act, he has demonstrably shown that he is indifferent to fighting corruption in the country." What is the logic that underpins that conclusion? How is it faithful to the principle of fair comment?
This is what you say to the world. This is what you say to the foreigners in our midst. How does it help Jamaica to tell them, without any demonstrable justification, that Jamaica's Minister of Justice is indifferent to fighting corruption here?
I repeat. For our development, we must take the utmost care in how we speak to and about each other, internally, and how we project ourselves, externally. The Gleaner, a venerable institution in our country, should be guided thereby, even if it always has the privilege of the last word.
I am, etc.,
A.J. NICHOLSON,Q.C.,
Attorney-General &
Minister of Justice
EDITOR'S NOTE: We thank the Minister of Justice for his speedy reply explaining why he was not at the seminar. He has, perhaps inadvertently, failed to address the substantive issue raised in the editorial, namely that one year after the Act governing its operations was passed, the Anti-Corruption Commission has neither office, staff nor budget with which to operate nor have the regulations been approved.
