Transparency, accountability and ethical conduct in the Commonwealth Caribbean

By Ian Francis:


Within the last few weeks, Grenada was once again consumed with a scandal that touched on admitted campaign funds received in Grenada for the National Democratic Congress (NDC).   As the evidence indicates, funds were received and deposited into various personal accounts of known individuals who hold elected and appointed important offices in Grenada.  There were many verbal and one written admission, which emanated in a statement from the Prime Minister’s Office.

As the prime minister’s press secretary comforted himself in the media room at the Botanical Gardens, Grenada’s airspace was once again circulated by a Qatar Airways Airbus 320 aircraft, which sought clearance to land at the Maurice Bishop International Airport in Point Salines.   Permission for landing was quickly granted and the Airbus made it way to the tarmac and took up a well located parking spot.

As the Airbus landed, numerous and unsubstantiated rumours and speculation surrounded the nation.   There was no welcoming diplomatic entourage on the ground and the flight did not appear to be a presidential flight.   Those of us who have taken the time to become aware of the diverse political habits of Arab leaders will know that they travel in pomp and ceremony, usually on a modified 747 similar to Air Force One of the United States of America.  In conversation with regional aviation experts, they all agreed that there is indeed a vast difference between an Arab presidential personal 747 and a 320 Airbus.

As the curiosity and speculation about the Qatar Airbus at MBIA continued, it was necessary to contact the press office of the Embassy of Qatar in Washington to determine whether the emir was on an official visit to Grenada.  After checking many other reliable sources, it became evidently clear that the emir was not in the Caribbean region, although there was a sanctioned Qatar delegation in the region.   With no official statement from the Thomas administration, it will be unfair to promote any further speculation.

Grenadians have been left in the dark as to whether there is any connection between the Qatar-Saudi Arabia-British Virgin Island monetary contribution to the ruling NDC and the follow up visit to Grenada by Saudi and Qatar officials.   What is very clear to Grenadians at home and in the Diaspora, is that money passed, money went into personal accounts and it has now been determined that it is an internal NDC matter that will be addressed by party officials.  With such an undertaking, it is hoped that at some appropriate time after the issue has been dealt with, the NDC will accord the necessary respect to Grenadians by sharing with them the outcome of the party’s internal adjudication task on this shameful and embarrassing episode to Thomas and his loyalists.

While the debate persists amongst local and leading legal minds, there seems to be a unanimous position that there was no law broken.  As a lay person, I concur with the legal minds.  However, there remains the issue of transparency, accountability and good ethical behaviour.  Given Thomas’s persistent denial and change of stories, only later to admit that funds from unknown persons had in fact arrived in Grenada and some made its way into his personal account, this behaviour by Thomas and his NDC loyalists raises many troubling questions and concerns.   If this unethical and roguish behaviour is evident within the ruling party, what stops it from being practiced and embraced in the government domain as it now seems obvious?

In my view, the current Grenada situation should give added impetus and expediency for regional institutional reforms and genuine capacity building initiatives.  In recognizing this urgent need, it would appear that the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) should take the initiative.   Why the OECS?   Available information indicates the MDCs within CARICOM have already taken some initiatives.   For example, it was only a couple of weeks ago that Jamaica’s National Security Minister, Peter Bunting announced the formation of a joint initiative to be known as MOCA to address corrupt practices across the Board.

The OECS, in its ongoing quest for fulfilling its multilateral mandate, needs to go beyond just the raking in of euro dollars and other pittances for environmental and other initiatives.  The OECS and its members are highly recognized and appreciated throughout the Commonwealth.   It would appear that, given the existing recognition, initiatives and other activities to implement transparency reform and good governance do not at all times have to carry a huge dollar tag.  It is also the responsibility of many OECS leaders to recognize and understand that, if they are truly and honestly committed to the building of the transparency and accountability process, working collectively and in a committed manner there is much that can be achieved.

My vision and understanding for building and sustaining a viable and effective transparent model in member states must be taken seriously.  There is much needed assistance that can be derived from Canada in health and legal governance, development of policies on sexual harassment and campaign financing.

Australia and the United Kingdom can assist in local government development; judicial planning and public sector human resource development.

Prior to beginning the task of building a strong and viable transparency model, it is incumbent upon OECS governments to settle the long outstanding and shameful resistance of full CCJ membership.  Once the CCJ membership is settled, each member state must comply with the old promises and posturing of appointing strong Ethics Commissioners with the necessary legislative powers to be independent and the right it investigate, expose and rule on all forms of unethical behaviour.

A good starting point should be the declaration of assets and their retirement to a blind trust.   OECS governments should not vacillate any further but to emerge and join collectively in building a strong transparency and accountable model.

June 18, 2012

Caribbeannewsnow

Have CARICOM governments surrendered foreign policy independence to the Secretariat?

By Ian Francis



The debates and concerns about regional independent sovereignty are very much alive in academic, communities and other concerned sectors in the Caribbean Commonwealth.  Many questions are being asked by those debating the issue. Recently, I became involved in the debate through my participation in a meeting amongst many concerned Caribbean nationals now residing in Toronto but maintain a deep affinity to the state from where they originally immigrated.

-- Is the foreign policy management process of independent Caribbean sovereign states, republics and nations managed through agencies that are in receipt of multilateral grants and contributions?

-- Are Commonwealth Caribbean governments exerting their sovereign rights and responsibilities to ensure that foreign policy decisions evolve through the government-designated ministry of foreign affairs?

-- Have our governments surrendered these sovereign rights due to concentration on managing the local economy?

-- Are they perceived simply as aid recipients and beggars that it is either the surrender of independent sovereign rights or getting the necessary aid?

Looking at the historical development of independence in the Commonwealth Caribbean, the names of Eric Williams, Forbes Burnham, Michael Manley and Errol Barrow cannot be forgotten as they clearly demonstrated their strong anti-colonialist stance and at the same time to ensure that the independence and management of their foreign policy remained intact in the various sanctuaries of their ministry of foreign affairs.

We cannot ignore their joint collective decision to ignore Washington’s objection when they made the decision to establish full diplomatic relations with the Republic of Cuba.  Burnham and Manley’s unflinching support for the liberation movement against apartheid in South Africa and membership in the Non-Aligned Movement were independent foreign policy decisions taken, which brought no smiles in the State Department.  In spite of the applied pressure unleashed on both Burnham and Manley, they stood their ground and demonstrated to the colonial interests that they are capable of making their own independent foreign policy decision.

In 1974, the courage against colonial domination was once again demonstrated by former prime minister of Grenada, Sir Eric Matthew Gairy, when he made the decision to lead Grenada, Carriacou and Petit Martinique to independence.  What was challenging about Grenada’s decision is that it became the first Associated State in the now renamed environment of the OECS Union to break its colonial shackles with Britain.

Grenada’s decision to become independent led to the formation of various local alliances that were vehemently opposed to independence, leading to strikes and other civil disobedience, which led to the emergence of the famous Committee of 22.  This Committee was made up of a group of local colonialists consisting of merchants, lawyers, farmers and other opposition factions. While their opposition to independence had some mitigating effects on the local economy, on February 7, 1974, Grenada, under the leadership of Eric Gairy, became independent and recently celebrated its 37th birth date as an independent nation.

Many of the other Associated States have since followed Grenada’s decision and finally broken the yoke of colonialism with Britain.  Many are known as independent Caribbean Commonwealth States.

With the More Developed Countries (MDC) maintaining the management of their independent foreign policy, Grenada followed suit and went on to manage its own foreign policy in a number of misguided ways by establishing diplomatic relations with many nations that had a disregard for individual human rights.  This misguided approach resulted in diplomatic relations with some notorious nations.

On the other hand, Grenada was successful in establishing a young corps of dedicated foreign service officers; joining many international organizations and of course taking its illustrious seat at the United Nations General Assembly; establishing its own embassies and consulates across the global community.  In essence, it is fair to conclude that Grenada built a foreign policy infrastructure between 1974-79, which the Bishop regime acquired following the 1979 people’s uprising, and which witnessed the overthrow of Gairy from office.

While some of Grenada’s foreign policy decisions have been severely criticized by many international relation experts, the period of government under the Bishop regime of 1979-83 also had some misguided moments like the Afghanistan vote, the unnecessary feud with former Barbados prime minister, Tom Adams, and the constant negative exchanges with Washington.

Based on a careful review of regional events, it would appear to the writer that the surrendering of Caribbean states’ foreign policy management to the CARICOM Secretariat could have started in the late 80s or early 90s.  With the surrendering of such an important pinnacle of any government, there have been many dull outcomes for regional independent governments.  Some of these dull outcomes have seen a steady decline in bilateral assistance to our governments and a sudden increase of multilateral assistance to the Secretariat and many other regional multilateral agencies.

In conclusion, it is not too late for regional independent states to reclaim their foreign policy management niche.  As they ponder the structural changes to be made within the Secretariat in the coming months, CARICOM’s management of regional foreign policy and its relation to international multilateral agencies require closer scrutiny.  It is hoped that under Thomas’s current chairmanship and vigour, he will be able to convince his Council of Ambassadors to take a second look at this situation.  A ministry of foreign affairs in any independent nation means more that good protocol practices. Formation of good foreign policies is crucial.

Ian Francis resides in Toronto and writes frequently on Caribbean Commonwealth Affairs. He is a former Assistant Secretary in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Grenada. He can be reached at info@vismincommunications.org

February 24, 2011

caribbeannewsnow