By Lynford Simpson, Staff ReporterPRIME MINISTER P.J. Patterson yesterday said he expected the Public Service Commission to issue a public statement on the findings of the panel that was set up to probe the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, towards the end of last year.
Mr. Patterson who was answering questions from Delroy Chuck, JLP spokesman on justice, said the PSC, which ordered the probe, would determine whether the report would be made available to Parliament.
"In view of all the publicity which this matter has attracted, it would appear appropriate for the Public Service Commission to issue a public statement after they have considered any report from the panel and taken such decisions as are appropriate," Mr. Patterson said.
However, he cautioned that there were: "A number of compelling reasons why the PSC might not be minded to make the report publicly available at this stage". These are:
The panel which is conducting the probe and which is headed by David Muirhead, Q.C., a former High Commissioner to the United Kingdom, had no authority to make any decisions or rulings, but was merely conducting an investigation to report to the PSC.
Members of staff at the DPP had been invited to respond voluntarily to the commission on the basis that the proceedings were, at this stage, private and confidential.
If it (a public disclosure) were to be applied to the DPP, it would also apply to other departments and agencies.
"This, to me, would seem to create a very dangerous precedent that might adversely affect the functioning of the commissions in the future," Mr. Patterson warned.
Reiterating that it was a matter of public importance, the Prime Minister said he expected that once the PSC had received the report, "weighed it and come to its decision, it would be in the public interest to make known what decisions it had arrived at and what action it regard as appropriate".
At that stage, a subcommittee of Parliament was likely to probe the report, with a view to conducting further enquiries or analyses of its own to enable Parliament to discharge its functions without usurping those of the PSC.
The probe of the DPP's offices was ordered in November last year following, what the Ministry of Justice said was, the "undesirable level of negative media coverage in recent months, as well as the atmosphere which exists among the staff at the offices".
Yesterday, the Prime Minister explained that the PSC was authorised to order the probe based on section 125 (1) of the Constitution. This section states that the powers to appoint persons to, or to remove persons from public offices, and to exercise disciplinary control over persons holding or acting in public offices are vested in the Governor General acting on the advice of the PSC.
The exception relates to Kent Pantry, Q.C., the DPP, and not to other persons employed in his office.
Mr. Patterson pointed out that to carry out these functions, the commission may from time to time receive recommendations and representations from heads of departments or other affected persons, and may have to carry out investigations into matters raised in those recommendations or representations.
