Skip to main content

Tivoli COE: Publish Compensation Details

 The recent outpouring of consternation about the financial  costs being incurred by the Tivoli Commission Of Enquiry is understandable in the context of competing national priorities. These  are being neglected, in part, due to financial constraints imposed upon and by the Ministry of Finance in conjunction with the International monetary Fund (IMF).

The Minister Of Justice, Senator Mark Golding, has stated on radio ("This Morning" on Nationwide) that "close to a $1 billion" has already been spent, primarily by the Ministry Of Labour & Social Security, in the aftermath of the Tivoli incursion/siege.
Member of Parliament, Desmond McKenzie, has refuted that amount ; countering that the "sum of $100 million" was the amount tabled in a report to the Parliament by the Minister of Labour & Social Security.

Now there is a world of difference between the amounts being stated as having been spent on Tivoli Gardens residents by the JLP Administration. More importantly, the amount spent is taxpayers' money.

Clearly whatever is the amount that was expended it is clear that;
 (a) it is deemed insufficient compensation for the damage caused by agents of the state; and
 (b) that the PNP Administration is not keen to devote additional sums to a JLP garrison, for actions              undertaken during a JLP Administration, ostensibly aimed at apprehending a JLP don.

The argument has been made that money being spent for the Tivoli COE could have been better spent on compensating the victims, repairing the damage done to physical structure and providing economic opportunities in Tivoli Gardens.

Additionally, there is also the view that, given the national financial constraints,  little or nothing will be left for the victims after the Tivoli COE has been completed. It is therefore critical that the budget for the Tivoli Commission of Enquiry be finalised and published.

The Government of Jamaica (GOJ) has an obligation to publish the complete details of the sums paid out in the aftermath of the Tivoli incursion. The taxpayers have a right to know how the money was allocated, the claims that were made, the proportion which were settled, and the details of the damage recognised as being occasioned by the security forces.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

DEA: Contracts with GOJ

Christopher 'Dudus' Coke  reputedly had tremendous wealth, powerful financial and commercial connections locally and internationally.The actual amount, nature, extent and location have never been made public.The proceeds of his drug running would have been strategically laundered with the assistance of shell companies strategically based in facilitating jurisdictions; business and property holdings arranged so as not to reveal the beneficial owner; and wherever possible, business conducted on a cash or barter basis. Coke had many business associates cum partners and substantial contracts with the Government of Jamaica (GOJ). The full extent of his business relationships with the GOJ has never been made public or verified. Nationwide News Network gave some indication of the number of contracts and the spread of government agencies involved: “Records from the Office of the Contractor General show that Incomparable Enterprise, a company owned and operated by Tivoli Gardens don...

"Declaration" Not "Determination"

Both the Prime Minister and the Speaker of the House of Representatives have conveniently confused calls for declaration of citizenship status by Members of either House with the determination of questions as to membership of either House. The Chief Justice of Jamaica has determined that individuals who have renewed their US passports and travelled thereon are disqualified from being validly elected or appointed as a Member of either House. Proponents of the impotence of the Speaker, in the matter of requiring a declaration by individual members, have sought to rely on Section 44 (1) of the Constitution which states: Any question whether - a. any person has been validly elected or appointed as a member of either House; or b. any member of either House has vacated his seat therein or is required, under the provisions of subsection (3) or subsection (4) of section 41 of this Constitution, to cease to exercise any of his functions as a member, shall be determined by the Supreme Court ...