Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1697649916703.pdf (Bahamas)
Contribution by Senator the Hon.

Carl Wilshire Bethel, Q.C.

Attorney-General and Minister of Legal Affairs to 2017/2018 Budget Debate 23rd JUNE, 2017 The Senate NASSAU, THE BAHAMAS Madam President, I beg leave to move for the Second Reading and Committal of a Bill for an Act to appropriate diverse sums of money for and towards defraying the expenses of the government of the Commonwealth of The Bahamas for the fiscal year 2017-2018.
It is indeed a pleasure and a privilege to once more be in this historic and ancient Chamber.

I wish to first of all congratulate Dr. the Hon.

Hubert Minnis, Prime Minister, upon his most historic and stunning electoral victory.

He truly can repeat the mantra of the Unconquered, as immortalized in the poem “Invictus”, by William Henley: Out of the night that covers me, Black as the pit from pole to pole, I thank whatever gods may be For my unconquerable soul.
In the fell clutch of circumstance I have not winced nor cried aloud.

Under the bludgeonings of chance My head is bloody, but unbowed.

Madam President I also wish to thank him for having had the confidence to appoint me to the high constitutional office of Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs.
I must also thank my dear wife Lisa, who has been the helpmeet, anchor and tower of strength and support for the greater part of my 2 Life, now in our 27th year of Marriage; my dear parents Wilshire and Yvette who made it all possible; and my Children for all their love and affection.

All of you have always tried in your own special ways to remind me of that better person that I could surely be, and pushed me to strive towards that ideal.
Madam President, the results of the general elections held on the 10th May, 2017 signaled a sea change in the expectations of the electorate for the qualities of governance, which they now demand.

It was truly a People’s Revolution.


The Bahamian People in their masses quietly lined up, sometimes for hours on end, waiting to cast their ballots, and in the time-honoured traditions of our longstanding Bahamian Democracy expressed, one vote at a time, their deep disquiet and visceral disgust at the manner in which the members of the former government had totally and utterly mis-managed the affairs of our great country.
Whether it was their abuse of the privileges of Parliament; their raw and uncouth intimidation of a local Magistrate; their failure to discipline their own Ministers; their cronyism; their extravagant spending and wastage of public funds on hair-brained contrivances such as Carnival; and a whole litany of betrayals, most particularly the betrayal of trust occasioned when the government showed its proverbial middle finger to Bahamians when they overturned the results of the NO vote in the gaming referendum, and went ahead to legalize web shop gambling.
These and other abuses contributed 3 mightily to the overwhelming and startling rejection of the former government at the Polls.

Madam President Let us all look at and accept the stark reality.

Bahamians like millions of others throughout our Caribbean Basin region, and elsewhere around the world, have had enough, more than enough, of governments who waste their hard-earned tax dollars, who appear to indulge in cronyism, wasteful spending and who appear to be corrupt.
They have had enough, and they want answers.

They demand to know what went wrong.

They demand to know the facts; the truth; and to see that those who have frittered away their patrimony ‘for a bowl of porridge’ are made to pay!

Let us, Madam President, look at the cold hard facts.

Last year, the former government went on a spending frenzy.

They incurred financial obligations in excess of their budgeted allocations to the tune of more than $790 Million Dollars!
They issued contracts and spent money, as we say, like it was going out of style.

They left $300 Million in unpaid commitments, that is, bills that must now be paid.

Hence, in this budget year, Madam President, the FNM government has been forced to borrow the unprecedented amount of more than $720 Million.

Imagine that a whopping $720 million right out of the starting gate.
Madam President, the immediate past and former Prime Minister famously was reported to have confessed that “it is easy to piss away 4 money”.

In the circumstances in which they have left our Bahamas, that is putting it mildly!

The Bahamian People, Madam President, are outraged and are demanding accountability.
They are demanding transparency; they want to know exactly what ‘went down’; who did what; who got what; and why it is that after borrowing more than $2 Billion between 2012 and 2017, AND imposing the VAT, which brought in a further $1.4 Billion dollars in tax revenue, they are faced today with a $300 Million shortfall of unpaid bills and contractual commitments, and a Public Debt Servicing requirement this year of $725,283,000.00.

UNBELIEVABLE.

Madam President, let me simplify the issue.


When the PLP came to office in 2012, the annual budget deficits had reached an average of $500 Million each year.

VAT was introduced for the express purpose of slowing the growth of that deficit; addressing the day-to-day cash flow shortages which plagued the government and caused it to continually have to use overdraft facilities; and to eventually bring down the National Debt.

VAT brought in increased cash flow to the tune of more than $700 Million each year.
Hence, to the ordinary Bahamian, if you run deficits of $500 Million, and now collect an extra $700 Million, then you should not have any more deficits going forward.

You should have at least $200 Million in the Treasury.

It is simple logic.
It is simple logic.

5 So, Madam President, had the former government simply held the line on spending to the levels of the previous budget year, there would have been a surplus on the recurrent revenue account of approximately $200 Million in 2015, and a further $200 Million surplus in 2016.

This would have likely been more than enough of a surplus over that two year period to meet the unexpected contingency spending caused by Hurricane Matthew.
Instead, the government went ahead in each year with further borrowing, while increasing spending, which increased and lavish spending absorbed all the borrowed funds as well as the revenue generated by the implementation of VAT.

There is an old saying, Madam President, “it isn’t what you earn, but what you spend, which determines your wealth”.
Madam President, the budget debate in the House of Assembly, “the Other Place”, as we call, it has begun to reveal the excessive spending which the PLP indulged in, whether it is in “no-bid” contracts issued to unqualified building contractors; or hastily concocted Public Private Partnership Agreements (PPP), cobbled together without the benefit of the knowledge or assistance of the trained Quantity Surveyors and Engineers at the Department of Public Works; and issued to “contractors”, some of whom only having recently formed their Contractor companies.
Bahamians would have heard of the decision by someone in the former government not to pay the premium to the Caribbean 6 Catastrophic Risk Insurance Facility, which left government to bear the full brunt of the costs of remediation and rebuilding in the wake of Hurricane Matthew.
Bahamians would have heard with justified horror of the overly generous host of consultancies throughout the public service, and of the award of, apparently, extremely generous contracts for Hurricane relief and clearance activities through NEMA.

Bahamians have heard of the Millions spent, while thousands of homes still suffer from lack of any contributions from NEMA for their roofs to be repaired.
Bahamians would have also heard repeated calls for the Attorney General to initiate “investigations” of these apparent or suggested “abuses” or alleged acts of “misfeasance”.

Madam President, this is the situation which now confronts us.

As Shakespeare wrote, ‘something is rotten in the State…’.
People feel it, they sense it and the Parliamentary Debate in the Other Place has raised questions which might tend to support the perceptions and the angst of the public, as expressed in that Other Place and in social media.

People want transparency, they want a full accounting.
They are aware of legal developments in the Caribbean Court of Justice which enshrined the ability to sue former Ministers of government for the Civil Tort of Misfeasance in a Public Office, but which case also referred to touched upon the Criminal cause of action for Misconduct in Public Office.
With all of the hue and cry being raised in Parliament and in the wider society and social media, Madam President, I must digress to remind the public of the very onerous and difficult balance that must 7 be struck by the Attorney General in the due administration of justice.

The Attorney General is a hybrid creature of the Constitution, being both Lawyer and Politician.

Initially he was, since the 14th Century “The King’s Lawyer”.
With the development of modern democracy, starting with Parliament’s ‘Glorious Revolution’ against the autocratic rule of Charles I in the 17th Century, the Attorney General became not the King’s Lawyer, but the Government’s Lawyer.
In 1924, Madam President, a former Attorney General Lord Birkenhead pronounced the classical doctrine of “Independent Aloofness” which he asserted must govern the considerations and actions of the Attorney General, saying that: "any decision on the matter of prosecutions is to be taken, not as a Minister, but as a judge.

If political considerations enter into a decision of this kind, he, applying his judicial mind, is to be the sole judge of those considerations.
In no circumstances must he allow the intrusion of political colleagues.

This doctrine has never in my recollection of legal and political history been departed from.” It is notoriously well known that Lord Birkenhead must have been suffering from ‘selective (and willful) amnesia’ when he pronounced this definition.
He was criticizing his successor in office (in the first Labour government) for having discontinued the prosecution of an alleged Communist, on the basis that the Prime Minister had influenced that AG to issue a nolle prosequi at a Cabinet Meeting.

8 However, he himself, while serving as Attorney General in the former Conservative government was known to have discontinued criminal cases at the behest of his Prime Minister.
Yet, notwithstanding the realities of English politics at that time, this statement is now universally accepted as being the standard of conduct to be expected of every Attorney General.

It is a standard from which I cannot and will not derogate!

A modern restatement of the role of the Attorney General might also be found in the Ruling of the Caribbean Court of Justice in the case of Marin & Coye v. The Attorney General of Belize delivered on the 11th June, 2011.
This was a civil, non-criminal case, where the new Attorney General commenced an action against former Ministers for the civil tort of “Misfeasance in a Public Office”.

In that case, the Hon.

Jacob Wit, JCCJ, in his Ruling said, the following: The position of Attorney General [106] It is true that the Attorney General is a politician.

But he is also a lawyer.

His role is a difficult one and requires him, as it is said, to adopt a schizophrenic approach within his overall public role.
He has to serve “two masters, the government and the law, and thus to combine the role of a politician with that of a lawyer.

As a result he is sometimes expected to exhibit partisanship and to pursue the government’s interest and at other times to be independent, impartial, upholding the public interest”.

There are no firm boundaries between these two 9 roles.
“The difficulty lies in the fact that, within our pluralist political culture, the content of the public interest or even the means by which it might be ascertained is often deeply contested.” This uncertainty “poses a problem to the law officer who genuinely seeks to act in the public interest and provides an opportunity for the law officer who is minded to let party political interests intrude into areas where the public interest should prevail”.
[107] Having said all that, however, “the image of a hired gun” can never entirely displace that of the “high priest”.

Despite the doubts one might have in general about the motives of a government of the day to sue its political opponents, I do not think that there is anything improper in entrusting the Attorney General with seeking compensation for damages caused by allegedly corrupt or abusive public officers, current or former.
The alternative (where there is no criminal prosecution) would be to do nothing.

In my view, that is not an alternative at all.

Moreover, far from creating or introducing “the softer option of civil liability” for “miscreants”, as the minority puts it, today’s majority ruling merely adds a common law layer to an option that, also in the opinion of the minority itself, already exists in equity.
What the ruling in fact “offers”, if one wants to use that word, is an extra tool for the State to fight corruption, to be used not instead of but in addition to other available tools….” 10 Madam President The general public and the news media must by now have noticed that I have been very circumspect and reluctant to engage or publicly comment upon any of the several controversial matters which might have agitated the minds of those listening to various speeches which have in one way or another sought to explain to the Bahamian people the causes of the fiscal and financial woes which now afflict the Country.
This is because I, as have my predecessors, take very seriously the burdens and duties of this Office.

Indeed, I have often said to Counsel and senior Officials in this Ministry that the Attorney General must be at all times the “Guardian of the Constitution”.
He/She must in all things be guided by its tenets and specific provisions and do all in his or her power to ensure that every organ of the State, and every Official therein, fully complies with the mandates, principles and tenets of the Constitution.
It is with these principles in mind that I can assure the Bahamian People that all lawful steps, and only lawful steps, will be taken by this Attorney General with vigor and determination to restore good governance; accountability; standards of conduct; requisite and appropriate transparency; and respect for the laws and ordinances of the Land.
We must restore those Landmarks and boundaries, set by our political forefathers which have, hitherto, prevented the worst excesses and abuses of governmental authority; far too many of which, I am sorry to say, appear at first glance to have been wantonly 11 abandoned by the last PLP administration.
Madam President, before delving into administrative aspects of the usual budget speech, in which the AG would ordinarily speak to the details of the budgetary allocations pertinent to his Office, the Judiciary and the other agencies with which he has Ministerial relations and a degree of oversight, I feel it necessary to address certain important matters of public controversy which have come to the fore of late.
These issues are (1) The decision of the Government to appoint “Consultation Senators” two of whom having provoked some controversy; (2) My decision to discontinue the Appeal to the Court of Appeal in the Parliamentary Privilege case of Jerome Fitzgerald; (3) the unsealing of the Bahamar Heads of Terms Agreement of the 22nd August, 2016; (4) the unanswered questions surrounding the issuance of so-called “Public Private Partnership” (PPP) contracts; (5) the creation of a new Bureau of Investigations; and (6) the determination of the Government to create an Independent Constitutional Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
Consultation Senators Our Constitution in Article 39 (4) requires that three Senators shall be appointed by the Governor general after consultation between the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition.

This constitutional requirement shows that it was the intention of the founders of this Commonwealth that the wider civil society should be given voice in 12 the Senate, rather than the purely party political ranks assembled in the HOA.
I cannot speak to the practices of the PLP, but certainly in every FNM government we have appointed Trades Unionists and other personages reflecting broader social activities than the purely political.

Such is the case now.


Senators Ranard Henfield, Senator Jennifer Isaacs-Dotson and Senator Sharon Annafaye Ferguson- Knowles were appointed after due consultation in order to give voice in this place to their social activism, advocacy for trades union rights, workers rights, the rights of women and children, and the broader concerns of civil society for a more transparent, open, inclusive and responsive democracy.
Their ideals are warmly embraced by this government, and it is expected that on matters peculiar to and directly related to their concerns they are able to speak freely and to vote their conscience.

That is the essence of the vision of our Nation’s founders, and it is one which this Government embraces.

All the negativity hurled at some of these Senators by members of the Party opposite is both hypocritical and unfair.
Parliamentary Privilege case Madam President, I turn now to make a few comments in respect of the appeal relating to the parliamentary privileges matter, involving the disclosure of private emails in Parliament by a former MP and Minister of Government.

As has been indicated, the Government of The Bahamas, through the Office of the Attorney General, has taken the procedural steps to have this matter formally withdrawn.
In this regard, a notice of 13 withdrawal was filed on 31 May 2017, and this is expected to be formalized early next week when the matter is set for mention before the Hon.

Court of Appeal.

Madam President, this matter has attracted quite a bit of public debate, not all of which (needless to say) has been accurate.

But there is one theme that has been consistent: it is the indignation of the general public in condemning the actions of the former MP and Minister which led to this unfortunate legal Action.
Let, me, Madam President, however, clarify a few matters for the record.

Firstly, there has been some murmuring as to the timing of the filing of the Notice, and the suggestion that this should have been done after consultation with the named appellants.

For clarity, this was an action brought against the Government, as represented by the Attorney-General, although it named one or more Government Ministers at various points.
Thus, although out of courtesy we have informed the named appellant of the withdrawal of the appeal, the conduct of this matter has at all stages been in the hands of the Attorney General, representing the Crown.

Secondly, the filing of the notice was done as soon as possible to immediately stop the escalation of costs in this matter.
As many members of this Honourable Chamber would be aware, legal costs in 14 respect of the withdrawal of an appeal are capped at the moment of the filing of the notice of withdrawal.

This matter has racked up huge legal costs, just on the Government side alone, in terms of the legal representation.

The former Government engaged the equivalent of three QCs— one from the UK, a local QC, and one from the Region—as well as a team from the AG’s Office, to deal with the appeal.
To date, Madam President, I understand that some $178,348.00 has been spent on legal costs for the foreign lawyers.

And this is even without any consideration of the huge legal costs that we are likely to face from the other side, which is likely to be in the tens if not hundreds of thousands.
Further, had the appeal proceeded, Madam President, it would likely have ended up before the Privy Council (whatever the outcome), causing an enormous drain on the public purse for no real value in terms of the development of jurisprudence.

While many persons have proclaimed the ruling as an assault on the doctrine of Parliamentary Privilege, it does no such thing.
What the Judge actually found was that the former Minister’s actions were attributable to the Government, and the Government (i.e., the Crown), as opposed to an MP or Parliament collectively, could not claim parliamentary privilege.

15 Thus, Madam President, there is no need to seek any clarification from an appellate court as to the scope or remit of parliamentary privilege.

There are several PC cases (many of which were cited to the Court) which clearly set out the proper scope and remit of privilege.
Let me go further to express two opinions which I hold, firstly that Parliament is a creature of the Constitution.

Parliament is Sovereign, but only Sovereign under the Constitution.

It has no ancient prerogatives that conflict with the Constitution which could survive its re-establishment by the Constitution.

Article 38 of the Constitution (prospectively) mandates that: “There shall be a Parliament of The Bahamas which shall consist of Her Majesty, a Senate and a House of Assembly”.
There are a number of Privy Council cases of longstanding which clearly establish the proposition that the authority of Parliament, in those states where there is a written constitution, is limited by and subject to the constitution which creates and empowers it.1 Secondly, Parliamentary Privilege is exactly that, a privilege.

If a privilege is abused it is, or ought properly to be, lost.
It follows therefore, Madam President, that I could not find any convincing legal or other reason for continuing to mount this expensive litigation at such an enormous expense to the taxpayer.

1 Bribery Commissioner v Ranasinghe (1965) AC 172, A.G.

(N.S.W.)

v Trethowan (1932) 2 AC 526.

[ 16 Baha Mar Madam President, as has already been announced by the Hon.
Prime Minister during his remarks wrapping up the budget debate in that other place, last week on an application by the Office of the Attorney-General, the Supreme Court of The Bahamas granted its approval for the disclosure and release of the Heads of Terms signed 22 August 2016 by the former Government with the Import-Export Bank of China (CEXIM).
That was an agreement which the former Government entered into with the Chinese Bank for the re-mobilization, completion and sale of the Baha Mar project—a part of which included setting up a fund to pay the majority of the Bahamian unsecured creditors (including the utility providers)—in return for which the Government granted valuable tax and others concessions.
That Agreement has now been tabled in Parliament, Madam President, and placed into the public domain, so that it can be subjected to the light of public scrutiny.

As has been explained, it has been done to engender a culture of governmental transparency, as was promised during the campaign.
It aligns with our fundamental values and belief that the exchange or bartering away of valuable public revenue and the national patrimony of The Bahamas - even if intended to serve a greater good - should not be done in secret.

Let me be very clear, our issue during the Campaign was not 17 the terms of the Agreement (we did not know what they were).
Our issue was the FACT of secrecy; the fact that a document which inevitable would contain tax concessions (which we now know to be the case), such a document was being kept secret and hidden from public scrutiny.

Such conduct is the very opposite of what people are entitled to expect in terms of good governance.

Madam President, this Government promised it would unseal that document in the public interest when it came to power and it has delivered on that promise.
However, Madam President, we are cognizant that there remain other commercially sensitive documents which were sealed at the request of the private parties to the Baha Mar matter, and which remain sealed pursuant to the Court’s order.

After careful review and discussion with the other parties, we are of the view that those documents should remain sealed for the time being, for the legal reasons which have been given by the Judge.
Those reasons were that the documents should remain sealed to preserve the integrity of the sales process, which remains a commercially live issue.

Madam President, the Heads of Terms was negotiated between the former Government and the Chinese Bank to facilitate the re- mobilization, completion of construction, and the opening, operation and eventual sale of the Baha Mar Resort.
18 The Agreement provided, among other things, Madam President, for the following: (i) a commitment by the CEXIM Bank to the immediate resumption and completion of construction of the resort, and the opening of the Casino, Casino Hotel, Convention Centre and Golf Course; (ii) a commitment from CEXIM to fund the remaining construction costs; (iii) the establishment of a voluntary fund of $101.5 million to pay the majority of unsecured creditors, including Government utility corporations; (iv) the establishment of a Claims Committee to oversee the payment process for unsecured creditors; and (iv) it set deadlines for the commencement of construction, and the completion of various steps needed to accomplish the completion, opening and sale of the Resort.
Madam President, it is our understanding that the settlement and/or payments of all valid claims of the unsecured creditors from the $101.5 million fund, including the Government utilities and outstanding taxes which were owed in the region of $50 million, have been made.
We also understand that a sum of $2.6 million is, however, being held in escrow for the purposes of paying preferential creditors (mainly foreign expatriate workers), although this remains subject to the Court’s ruling as to the obligation of CEXIM to pay such claims from the secured assets.

19 Under the Agreement, Madam President, the Government also proposed to grant valuable concessions and consents.
These were granted to the SPV Group which owns the Baha Mar assets (for the time being acting as developer), and are described as the “Construction Concessions”, and concessions were also foreshadowed for the Proposed Developer/Operator.

The “Developer” concessions, however, were deferred until the Proposed Purchaser made a binding commitment to purchase a controlling interest in the Baha Mar assets and pending further negotiations with the proposed purchaser.
Madam President, the Government provided that the SPV Group would have the benefit of a number of additional concessions during the remobilization and construction phase, which are contained in a separate Hotels Encouragement Act (“HEA”) Agreement annexed to the Heads, and include the following:  Exemptions from VAT and import taxes for importation of goods and services for the completed work and the remaining work of the whole Project.
 The grant of up to 1,200 work permits to be issued to China Construction of the Americas (Bahamas Ltd.) (“CCA”) [the construction company responsible for the Project]; and 20  The grant of 30 additional work permits for all necessary staff of the Asset SPV, including its agents and staff required to supervise and carry out the Project.
Madam President, the Government also agreed to waive stamp duty and VAT on the interim transfer of assets from the Baha Mar Companies to Asset SPV [one of the special purpose vehicles created by the Bank to hold the assets] and its subsidiaries, and on the funding arrangements for Asset SPV and its subsidiaries.
It agreed further to waive any VAT applicable to an amendment to the original construction contract between Asset SPV and CCA, or arising from the novation of the construction contract to Asset SPV.

The Agreement provided that the Government would not grant the developer/operator concessions until the proposed (final) purchaser had made a binding commitment to purchase a controlling interest in the entity that now owns the resort (namely Asset SPV).
Madam President, in consideration for the payments that CEXIM, Claims SPV and/or Asset SPV agreed to pay in accordance with the provisions of the Agreement, it further provided that the acquisition by the purchaser of a controlling interest in the project would not attract stamp duty or VAT, although any other (or subsequent) transfers would attract such duty.
21 Madam President, these concessions to the Purchaser were articulated and augmented in a subsequent Heads of Agreement (“HOA”) between the former Government and CTF Enterprises, dated 25 April 2017.
The concessions in this HOA included exemptions under the Hotels Encouragement Act; exemption from VAT on inter-group transfers and refinancing arrangements; the capping or removal of stamp tax on various legal transactions, and a commitment by the Government to contribute some $4 million per year to marketing costs over an 8- year period commencing with the opening of the Casino.
Madam President, This Government has made it clear that it would certainly have taken a different approach to the way legal and other matters were handled in respect of the Baha Mar matter.

However, no one can deny the importance of the project to the economy and people of The Bahamas.

Furthermore, as we have seen demonstrated on more than one occasion, the fortunes of a development of this magnitude have the capacity to affect our international financial ratings.
Thus, Madam President, even though we may disapprove of the way certain legal and other matters were handled in respect of the Baha Mar matter, as a responsible Government, we will do everything to facilitate the completion, sale, and opening of the Resort, so that the full measure of its potential economic benefits can be realized for the Bahamian people.
22 In this regard, the PM has instructed my Office to remain engaged with the stakeholders in this project and to continue to use the good offices of the Government to ensure that this matter remains on track and to update the public on essential developments.

Public Private Partnership (PPP) Contracts Madam President, upon assuming office I was immediately presented with six (6) Memoranda of Understanding (“MOUs”) for respective proposed Public Private Partnerships.

They related to proposals to: 1.


Construct an administrative office building on 30 acres of prime agricultural Crown Land on Gladstone Road; 2.

Re-construct an administrative office for the Administrator and Police Station in Harbour Island, entered into with the same Company which had agreed to build the Gladstone Road complex; 3.

Construct a new Administrator’s office and Police Station in Eight Mile Rock; 4.

Construct a new General Post Office at the Independence Drive Plaza; 23 5.
Construct a new building to house the Road Traffic Department at TWD Highway and Knowles Drive; and 6.

Provide contractual works pursuant to a scope of works, which had no pricing information, all in respect of the Fox Hill Community Centre.

Madam President, I immediately inquired whether there were any contracts made in respect of these MOUs.
I was informed that there was only one (1) which had been formalized into an actual contract, namely the agreement with the Company which had undertaken two jobs at Gladstone Road and in Harbour Islands.

The two MOUs had been combined into one contract.

That MOU called for the 30 acres to be granted to the builder by a Crown Grant, so that it could then lease the same land back to the government.
The transfer of title was said to be so as to enable that builder to borrow necessary funds from a Bank to fund the construction.

I am informed, Madam President, that the Crown Grant was executed by the former government within days, if not on the day, of the general elections.

Madam President It now transpires, so far as we know now, that in fact two (2) other contracts were entered into, one for the new General Post Office, and the third for the Eight Mile Rock building.
Officials of my Ministry, although they were briefed and working on the proposed contracts, had not “signed off”, or given the O.K., to the signing of these two 24 contracts, and were never informed that officials in another Ministry had gone ahead, and signed them, one on the 9th May, 2017, a day before the general elections.
All of these MOUs or contracts, Madam President, have now been put on hold pending a thorough review to determine if they or any one of them are truly in the best interests of the People, in respect of their pricing or other terms and conditions, and whether there was anything untoward in respect of any of them.

Bureau of investigations Madam President The Government in its Manifesto committed to establish a new investigative body dedicated to investigating corruption and abuse by public officials.
I can inform this Honourable Chamber that, working closely with the Minister of National Security, the Hon.

Marvin Dames, this commitment is being quickly advanced.

Subject to governmental approval, Bahamians can be confident that such an agency, going forward, will become a bulwark and sea wall to protect civil society from any resurgence of the tide of abuse and apparent wastage of the public’s hard earned tax dollars by public officials and/or politicians.
25 An Independent Director of Public Prosecutions Madam President The Government in its Manifesto committed to amend the Article 78 of the Constitution to create the constitutional Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
Because Article 78 is not an entrenched or specially entrenched provision of the Constitution, the proposed Bill will merely require to be a Bill which expressly states that it is intended to amend the Constitution, and only requires a simple majority of 50% plus one vote in both Houses of Parliament to be enacted into Law.

The current impetus for this renewal of the earlier endeavor of the FNM government in 2001/2002 to create the Office of an independent DPP is firstly based upon Principle.
We believe that there should be a greater degree of separation between politicians and prosecutors.

However, the public clamour for this change can largely be attributed to the entire mistrust and suspicions provoked by a notorious nolle prosequi entered in order to discontinue the prosecution of alleged former clients.
Be that as it may, Madam President, I have instructed the draftspersons in my Office to prepare an appropriately constructed draft Bill to amend the Constitution to achieve the public policy of the Government.

26 Once the Constitution is so amended, in future Budgets the DPP will receive a block grant to cover the expenses of his Office, as does the Industrial Tribunal under Head 90 of our Budgetary allocation.
It should be noted, Madam President, that both the DPP and his prosecutors are and will remain Public Legal Officers and, as such, all matters concerning appointments, promotions and reclassifications will continue to be advanced through the administrative channels of the Office of the Attorney General and the JLSC.

Similarly, as occurs in other jurisdictions, the office of the DPP will, for the immediate future continue to operate from a separate floor in the Paul L. Adderley Building.
However, we are now looking at a rental property in the City, initially as a place of respite for our prosecuting Counsel, who prior to now have had no place to go during trial breaks or while waiting for jury verdicts and who feared for their safety in some instances.

If suitable, we will seek all necessary approvals to have the Office of DPP relocated to that area, as well.
Madam President, I now turn to the specifics of the Budget and the day to day workings of the Office of the Attorney General and Ministry of Legal Affairs.

I note that this Office has a wide range of functions and responsibilities.

Madam President, by the allocation of portfolios the Attorney General, most ably assisted by the astute and highly intelligent Minister of State, the Hon.
Ellsworth N. Johnson, MP for Yamacraw, has the responsibility of: 27  Being the Legal Advisor to the Government;  Drafting and preparing legislation  Relations with the Judiciary and The Bahamas Bar Association;  Relations with the Industrial Tribunal;  Criminal Prosecutions;  Mutual Legal Assistance;  International Legal Cooperation;  Law reform and Revision;  Legal Education;  Coroners;  The Registrar General  Relations with URCA.
Madam President, the astute critic will immediately notice that nowhere in that list is to be found any mention of the newly established Public Defenders Association.
Let me first congratulate my immediate predecessor for this initiative which, I have no doubt, will over time contribute to the improvement in the administration of justice by reducing the delays caused when Defendants are un- defended by counsel, and the Courts then have to extend time to facilitate a fair trial, and also be causing a reduction in the amount of money which has to be allotted to award Crown Briefs to private sector Attorneys.
Madam President, the Association was officially constituted in January of this year.

My predecessor and the former government did 28 not establish the specific head or item in the Budget to pay for their salaries and recurrent expenditure.

These are currently being paid from the budgetary allocation to the OAG.

Next year their budgetary allocations will be separated under their own item, by way of a block grant, similar to that afforded to the Industrial Tribunal and the Eugene Dupuch Law School.
The allocations of Cabinet portfolios will also be adjusted to include an item named “Relations with the Public Defenders Association”.

This is important, because Public Defenders are not to be considered to be another arm of the Attorney General’s Office.

They are independent.

They are to serve those indigent members of the public who may face serious criminal charges but be unable to retain a lawyer.
We should remember the constitutional right of every defendant to have a fair trial within a reasonable time, as prescribed by Articles 20 (1) and 20 (8) of the Constitution.

The Association is managed by a Board of Directors of a not for profit Company, comprised of five (5) Directors, led by retired Justice Joseph Strachan.
There are presently four (4) public defenders engaged by the Association, and they are housed in the former Wild Flowers Building at the intersection of Marlborough Street and Virginia Street in downtown Nassau.

Madam President, functionally the OAG is divided between its Civil Law and Criminal Law duties, at the present time.

There are approximately 76 Attorneys employed, and a further 18 Pupil 29 Attorneys.
A further six Attorneys are employed but deployed to other government Ministries or Departments, or the Judiciary.

The Civil Law division is further subdivided into different sections, the International Legal Cooperation Unit, and the Civil Section.

The ILCU is basically comprised of those Attorneys who act in matters related to international cooperation.
These are the Attorneys who stand in the gap, so to speak, in the forefront of the battle to preserve the integrity of The Bahamas as a respected international financial services provider.

They ensure that those who would abuse our financial sector to hide their ill-gotten gains will face the full brunt of law.
Madam President, the Civil section deals with all government contracts, advises generally on any legal issues affecting the Government, (that is, Ministries; Departments and or Corporations) and conducts all civil litigation which is not farmed out to outside private sector attorneys.

The Civil Section also embraces the Parliamentary Draftspersons who reside in the OAG.
It should be noted that a lot of our drafting of legislation is also done by the Law Reform & Revision Commission Attorneys, who are stationed in the British American Building situate in Navy Lion Road downtown.

Madam President, Civil Chambers deals with all government contracts, leases or agreements including Heads of Agreement and 30 advises generally on any legal issues affecting the Government Ministries; Departments and Corporations.
Law Reform and Revision Commission Madam President The general function of the Commission as regards law revision is to keep under review the laws of the Bahamas with a view to modernizing their systematic development and reform.
Under the Law Reform and Commission Act, the Commission is required to: ● prepare a revised edition of the laws, once every five (5) years; ● prepare annual updates of the loose leaf edition of the laws showing what amendments and new laws have been enacted since the production of a revised edition; and ● arrange for the printing and publication of the revised edition and the annual updates.
Department of Public Prosecutions Madam President The Criminal division is headed by Mr. Garvin Gaskins, who is the Director of Public Prosecutions.

The Department of Public Prosecutions (“DPP”) is the division of the OAG that has been authorized by the Attorney-General to institute, prosecute or cease 31 criminal proceedings against any person, who is alleged to have committed a criminal offence.
The DPP, Madam President, is responsible for the prosecution of all criminal matters before the Supreme Court; Court of Appeal and the general oversight of Magisterial prosecutions.

In 2017, it is intended that the DPP will assume responsibility for prosecution in the Magistrates court of serious matters, such as, drugs and gun offences and trafficking in persons.

Madam President, one of the key roles of the Office of the Attorney General is to serve as superintendent of public prosecutions.
A key objective relative to this constitutional function is to achieve an efficient and effective criminal justice system.

New Initiatives in the office of the Attorney General Madam President Upon assuming office, I met in place several initiatives which are aimed at fixing several critical problem areas that affect the administration of justice.

The most important is the proposed reform of the system of reporting to police stations by persons who have been released from custody on Bail.
Steps are being taken and approvals will be sought to implement a system of digital reporting in which suspects on Bail will be able to go to the police station and sign in with their fingerprints and facial identification.

This will enable 32 better record keeping and monitoring of compliance with the terms and conditions of Bail.

Criminal Case Management Madam President The Criminal Case Management Unit incorporates the following sections: case management, witness care, and court liaison section.
The fundamental purpose of the Case Management Unit is to provide comprehensive support to all legal officers within the Office of the Attorney-General.

Case Management It is the responsibility of all case management officers, Madam President, to follow-up with prosecutors after every case management exercise.
Once the files are brought back to Case Management Unit, officers are required to read the endorsement on each file and make notes of any request, and also all upcoming dates (mentions, pre-trials, fixtures, and trials).
Case management, Madam President, also has the responsibility for: the distribution and tracking of all voluntary bills of indictment (VBI) files; the listing and preparation of all arraignment files; the requesting of pathology reports; PMH medical reports; DVDs and police statements from Royal Bahamas Police Force; and the preparation of all bail files for all bail applications before Supreme Court, Magistrates Courts and Court of Appeal.
33 Witness Care Unit Madam President, the witness care unit started as a pilot project in October 2010 in alignment with the United Nations declaration of basic principles of justice for victims of crime and abuse of power.

The witness care unit was officially launched in February 2011.

Victims and witnesses are contacted soon after arraignment, and when trial dates are set.

The witness care unit also keeps in regular contact with witnesses and victims.
They are updated on the status of their case every two months from arraignment; they are also informed of the results of all bail hearings in Supreme Court.

However, details about bail hearings will continue to be found on the office of the Attorney-General’s website.

Court liaison section Madam President, this section’s primary function is the preparation and service of subpoenas on all witnesses within the Commonwealth of The Bahamas, and internationally.
In addition, and as necessary, assigned officers assist with the transportation of witnesses to and from all courts.

34 The need for a Forensic Pathology Laboratory Madam President The major issue which is inhibiting too many timely and effective prosecutions is the lack of a forensic laboratory.

Too many cases are crippled, if not lost outright, by the absence of a forensic laboratory and a dedicated Pathologist assigned to the Royal Bahamas Police Force.
This is most particularly harmful in sexual offences cases as well as any case in which DNA evidence forms a critical part of the prosecution’s case.

Over the coming year we shall work tirelessly to bring this long awaited critical need into operation.
The Judiciary Madam President In consultation with the Lord Chief Justice, Sir Hartman Longley, and the President of the Court of Appeal, Dame Anita Allen, it is the intention of my Ministry to seek the appointment of an additional Supreme Court Justice, whose remit will be focused exclusively upon holding trials of all the backlog cases, some more than a decade old, as well as current sexual offences and domestic violence cases.
Madam President, far, far too many sexual offence cases are lost or have to be nolled because victims particularly become frustrated by the long delays; move on with their lives; and in any event, feel doubly victimized first by their attacker, and secondly by the apparent delays if not actual neglect of the State.

This court will be located in 35 the old Supreme Court Building, once the Criminal Registry is relocated.
Further, Madam President, the Court of Appeal has recently completed the construction of a second courtroom and, thus by the addition of two (2) new Justices of Appeal, we hope to have both courts in active use, with full Panels of three Justices of Appeal thereby greatly speeding up the administration of justice in that Court.
Utilities Regulatory and Competition Authority The Utilities Regulation and Competition Authority (URCA), Madam President, is the regulatory authority with responsibility for the electronic communications sector (ECS) in The Bahamas.

The sector comprises fixed and mobile telephone services, spectrum and numbering, internet services and broadcasting including pay television.
URCA reports to the Minister with responsibility for relations with URCA, currently the Attorney General, in respect of its operations including its budget, financial statements, and legal oversight.

I have assigned day to day oversight of ARCA’s activities to the Minister of State for Legal Affairs.

Madam President The high calling of Attorney General is an appointment which I take with the utmost seriousness.
I have often had cause to remind my senior legal officers of the old adage, “Caesar’s Wife must be beyond reproach”.

This is my charge to each Attorney in that Office, and all 36 senior Officials.

Together we will work with every ounce of strength to restore good governance, transparency and integrity to government; to root out the canker of corruption, and to restore those ancient Landmarks of our forefathers, to bring liberty, justice and fair and open government to all.
I close with the rousing peroration in Lord Tennyson’s great poem ‘Ulysses”, a poem which expresses the spirit with which I embrace this arduous task: ’Tis not too late to seek a newer world.

Push off, and sitting well in order smite The sounding furrows; for my purpose holds To sail beyond the sunset, and the baths Of all the western stars, until I die.

It may be that the gulfs will wash us down: It may be we shall touch the Happy Isles, And see the great Achilles, whom we knew.
Tho’ much is taken, much abides; and tho’ We are not now that strength which in old days Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts, Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

Madam President, I take considerable pride in supporting the 2017/2018 Budget presented by the Member for East Grand 37 Bahama, the Hon.

Peter Turnquest, Deputy Prime Minister of Finance under the leadership of our Prime Minister, the Hon.
Hubert A. Minnis.

38