ACC has ten active cases
(CNS): Since its creation in January 2010 the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) has kept a low profile and been tight lipped about the investigations it has undertaken, and only one person has been charged under the relevant legislation. However, it has now produced a newsletter and begun publishing minutes of meetings on its website. According to the latest minutes, the RCIPS Anti-corruption Unit is actively working on ten live investigations, having received some 53 complaints since its inception. In the newsletter the ACC says that while the destructive results of corruption are obvious, in practice it is difficult to identify corruption in every case.
In the latest minutes which have been published on the website from the commission’s August meeting, Detective Inspector Richard Oliver, who is one of the RCIPS’ Anti-corruption Unit officers, reported on the types of cases being handled by the unit, the workload and the resources needed. Specific details such as names, locations and dates were not included in the minutes due to security issues.
Since inception there have been 53 complaints registered with the ACC. Of those, 20 are 'pending' and waiting further or sufficient information which may make it appropriate to make further investigations. Another 20 have been concluded, three have been transferred to other investigative units for action and ten are under current active investigation.
In the commission’s second ever newsletter, the ACC offers advice to civil servants about receiving gifts and whether it is ever appropriate even if the intention is not corrupt.
“The intention behind the giving of a gift — and what the community may perceive as the intention — should always be considered in determining whether accepting the gift is appropriate,” the letter states. “Public officials need to have a very clear understanding of what to do when they are offered a gift or benefit and the implications of accepting a gift or benefit. The offer of gifts or benefits can present a corruption risk because it has the potential to affect the impartiality and integrity of the agency in carrying out its functions.”
Although gifts and benefits may be offered out of gratitude and goodwill for a job well done, they can also be a subtle form of influence creating a sense of obligation that may compromise impartial and honest decision making, the ACC warned.
Advising managers to make a risk assessment of conflicts of interest in their departments, the ACC said that this can help identify any undue influence or bribery that may be going on. Government departments need to introduce policy and procedures for the management of gifts and benefits, which include sanctions for any breach of the procedures, train employees, record all gifts and prohibit employees from accepting or soliciting cash or gifts under any circumstances.
See newsletter here and minutes here.
Category: Crime
In some places they promote the thieves and get rid of the honest civil servants!
1) Cohen deal overspent by $450,000
2) GLF $3,000,000
3) Ryan unpaid duty $6,000,000
4) Dart deals, giving away far too much
5) Stan Thomas Vegas fiasco
6) Gas Boy
7) Firing civil servants for doing their job and following the law
8) Illegal Paving
9) Removing senior civil servants who Mac can't "wuk" with.
10) Panama flight party
11) – oh wait, there are only 10!
,
OH MY GOODNESS! It's April Fools Day and nobody told me!
In it's newsletter quote: The ACC says that "WHILE THE DESTRUCTIVE RESULTS OF CORRUPTION ARE OBVIOUS", in practice it is "DIFFICULT TO IDENTIFY" in every case.
Here we go folks! We've just been given a heads up. Meaning! That in the event certain people who from all appearances may have been involved in corrupt activity are not charged. We should not be surprised!
WHAT A STRANGE WORLD WE LIVE IN.
Would a minister be guilty if he sets up a "Nation Building" (slush) fund and the money not only goes to his political supporters but is spent throught his supporters companies? Double dipping corruption?
What about the proposed 1500 foot road in Cayman Brac that will only benefit a senior UDP functionary and her family?
Until someone goes to Northward for corruption it will remain business as usual.
So in other words there have been no charges of corruption brought by the ACC at this time.
Just curious: If I were a high-ranking political figure and purchased say a condo in a project at a very reasonable price and then further along granted duty exemptions for a time to the project and then further along allowed payments to lapse and on the side didn't prevent the destruction of sensitive mangroves for another project by the same owner. Would that have the appearance of accepting a gratuity for subsequent favors?
Wow, respect to those that have given up or cut off their profitable political or civil servant careers to take part in one of the biggest uphill battles of their lives. WOW, just WOW you have the guts to take a shot at this elephant.
Yes it must be difficultto spot corruption, so a couple of questions so I might see it for what it is.
For example, would a politician beguilty if he used his position to change the law, say in relation to building height, so that it benefitted himself or financially linked outsiders?
Would a minister be guilty if he used his position to influence a decision on land rezoning, and in some way benefitted himself?
Would a minister be guilty if he , say, cancelled a properly negotiated public contract and awarded it to an organisation known for offering corrupt payments?
Just a few examples, I think I know the answer, but when it is so difficult to see what is corrupt, a bit of guidance might help!
Would a minister be guilty if he lowered the stamp duty just before his "wifes" real estate company sold a hotel?
The playing field is not level.
The good people work within the law.
The bad people twart the good people through lies and intimidation.
We are not going to fix this one easily. All we can do is help the good people to do their work and cheer them on.