SXMElections.com

PHILIPSBURG--St. Maarten should chair the Integrity Chamber that will come into being for the country should Parliament pass the draft National Ordinance to establish the Chamber. That Chamber also should render "advice" to the Council of Ministers and not "binding advice" as the draft currently states.

These are among the changes the United People's (UP) party wants to see in the draft law when Prime Minister Marcel Gumbs and Justice Minister Dennis Richardson bring it back to Parliament possibly in August to continue deliberations on it.

UP faction leader MP Franklin Meyers, speaking on Monday in the now-suspended plenary session of Parliament on the law, outlined the changes his party wants to see made to the law. The meeting was suspended to give Government time to make the proposed adjustments.

Only Government and not an Integrity Chamber can bind the country to any action, Meyers said, explaining the party's motivation for the removal of the word "binding." However, the sanction on Government for not responding to an advice of the Chamber will be that the advice becomes a decision by Government by operation of law.

He added that it was important for integrity issues to be "dealt with swiftly." As such, the law should have a timeframe for a pre-investigation that is to be limited to three months and the total timeframe of pre-investigation up to the date the report is submitted may not be longer than one year. If the time frame is exceeded, this will lead to the Integrity Chamber investigation not being admissible and the case becoming time-barred.

Government should have 12 weeks, not four weeks as is now stated in the law, to react to any advice from the Chamber, said Meyers. The extended period will give enough time to react and, if deemed necessary, to carry out a small investigation prior to responding to the advice.

The party also called for a change in the law to allow for a person to clear up any ambiguity when a person needs to cooperate with an investigation by the Chamber and when one can distance him-/herself.

"It is important that persons have the right to 'plead the fifth' so to speak. One of the basic rights in a society is that one cannot be forced to incriminate oneself," said Meyers.

It is suggested that a cap of one year is put on the Prosecutor's Office to determine whether it will prosecute a person based on the findings of an Integrity Chamber advice. "This means that the prosecutor should act fast when charges are filed in that regard. ... This is in line with the principles of fair trial," Meyers said.

On St. Maarten taking up the chairmanship of the Chamber, Meyers said it was important that the leading role of St. Maarten be "underlined" in the law. "St. Maarten has the leading role in countering integrity issues and as such also in establishing and chairing the Integrity Chamber. The fact that other kingdom partners want to be involved does not affect those principles and that role," he said.

Another proposed amendment calls for the removal of Article 17 from the draft law. This article deals with already-regulated immigration matters. "St. Maarten has already a law that deals with the admittance and expulsion of foreigners. ... Parliament sees no need to arrange something that is already arranged," said Meyers.

A change to Article 4 calls for a further elaboration on the Chamber having the authority to investigate in "every place." The suggestion is to add "every place where government has a direct or indirect right of use established for government use."

Meyers said it was doubtful that persons who worked in the Chamber's secretariat could be considered "investigating officers" with the power of Justice officials to enter everywhere, including private homes.

"Parliament wants to avoid the situation in case evidence is gathered in an investigation that such evidence cannot be used as it was gathered by the wrong persons. ... In the event the Chamber becomes aware of severe breaches of the integrity that might warrant the raid of a private business or home, the Integrity Chamber should file criminal charges and the Justice chain should take over the investigation."

An addition to Article 23 is called for to clearly outline that information gathered by the Integrity Chamber will be used only for the purposes of the Chamber.

"The information could, for instance, end up in reports of the VDSM [National Security Service – Ed.], mentioning in vague terms that there 'might' be a 'potential risk' concerning the integrity of a person when applying for a job where such a report can be relevant, resulting in a negative advice concerning said person," said Meyers.

The Chamber has to be in line with the Law on the Protection of Personal Data and such should be noted in the draft law. This will allow for solely personal information gathered by the Chamber at the time of the (pre)investigation and afterwards to be deleted from the Chamber's register, he said.

The addition of a paragraph to the draft law to state that persons who intentionally make erroneous reports to the Chamber also will be punished by law is to prevent persons, out of spite and/or based on hearsay, from reporting someone to the Chamber without any consequence for them, said Meyers.

A timeframe of three months must be set out in the draft law during which the "mutual arrangement" is established. Meyers said it was important that the Chamber be operational soon, as the remuneration of its members and the portion St. Maarten and the Netherlands will contribute to the Chamber's budget must be established.

"If parties cannot come to an arrangement within three months the consequence will be that Article 34 will come into effect, which will give St. Maarten the possibility to have the Chamber operational within very short by itself," said Meyers.