As the term of office of the Integrity Commission chairman, Ken Gordon, comes to an end next Friday, there will be much speculation about whether or not President Carmona will re-appoint Gordon for another term or appoint a new chairman.
Shortly after he assumed office as President and when faced with the challenge of whether or not he was going to replace Ken Gordon as chairman in June 2013 owing to the controversy surrounding the revelation of his secret meeting with the Leader of the Opposition, President Carmona chose to pass on the idea.
Now Gordon's term is at an end. It will be interesting to see who will be appointed. Gordon's tenure has been marred by various controversies which have placed the Integrity Commission in a very controversial light.
The two main controversies involved the Sherman McNicholls/John Jeremie complaint and the handling of the Emailgate allegations made by the Leader of the Opposition.
In the former case, there were tensions between Gordon and the then deputy chair, Gladys Gafoor, in December 2011 because of her refusal to accede to Gordon's request to recuse herself from the deliberations involving a complaint against former attorney general John Jeremie and his actions in relation to a land deal in which former chief magistrate Sherman McNicholls was involved.
In the latter case, Gordon facilitated an urgent meeting at his home in May 2013 after a request was made by the Leader of the Opposition one evening, just five days before the Leader of the Opposition would pilot a motion of no confidence in the Parliament seeking to remove the Government from office.
Gordon already had in his possession the documents that Rowley would use in Parliament, having received them from former president Richards in March 2013.
These two controversies dominated Gordon's tenure and proved to be quite damaging to the image of the Integrity Commission. Having assumed duties as chairman in November 2011 very little time had elapsed before the Jeremie/McNicholls matter was revived and became contentious.
By January 2012 legal action was underway. In February 2012 President Richards suspended Gafoor in very controversial circumstances. The commission was successful in the courts and the appeals were withdrawn.
As President Carmona contemplates his decision, one can only hope that he will make an appointment one way or the other at the end of Gordon's term this week. The recent past history of presidential appointments to this particular commission has been chequered. These difficulties started during the presidency of George Maxwell Richards and they have continued.
The lowest point of all was the collapse of the entire Integrity Commission over a period of eight days in May 2009, and the failure of Richards to appoint a replacement commission until March 2010.
The May 2009 Commission was appointed to replace the one that resigned en masse in February 2009 after an adverse court ruling in a matter involving Dr Rowley.
The changing of three chairmen over a period of two years emphasizes the point about the difficulties involved in permitting some sustainability in the office of chairman. The resignations of John Martin (February 2009), Father Henry Charles (May 2009), and Dr Eric St Cyr (October 2011) contributed to the perception of instability of the Integrity Commission.
The problems have persisted since then, and President Carmona had to revoke the appointment of the current deputy chairman, Justice Ventour, to permit him to deliver some outstanding High Court judgments from his prior tenure as a judge and then have him re-appointed as deputy chairman thereafter, all during February this year.
Alongside all of this, the accountant Sieunarine Jokhoo resigned in March this year and was replaced by accountant Joel Edwards in May, and he then resigned in July. Edwards was later replaced by accountant Pete London in September.
This persistent instability that has plagued the Integrity Commission does not augur well for the functioning of the Integrity in Public Life Act. What was intended to be the cure for all of the allegations of impropriety in public life when it was first unveiled as a brand new institution in our republican constitution in 1976 has turned out to be an institution whose image has been shaken by all of the controversies that have swirled around it since February 2009.
The commission has never been able to settle itself ever since that adverse court matter in February 2009. Since that time, the commission has been bathed in legal and political controversy. Whether the commission will get a chance to settle down to its pre-2009 days of relative stability is left to be seen.
The commission really cannot take anything for granted. What seemed like a relatively sedate meeting on August 6, 2006, in relation to what was described by Andre Bagoo in the Sunday Newsday of February 15, 2009, as an agenda item entitled "Report of the Utilisation of Materials and Labour from the Scarborough Hospital Project and Construction Site for use in a private housing development owned by Minister Keith Rowley" turned out to be the commission's judicial demise and started a period of instability.