Christie stands by Air J probe findings

Saturday, November 21, 2009 9:44 PM

LATEST NEWS:

News

Tuesday, November 03, 2009

CONTRACTOR General Greg Christie yesterday said he stood by his findings that former finance minister Dr Omar Davies had unlawfully and improperly intervened in the sale of Air Jamaica's London Heathrow slots to Virgin Atlantic in early 2007, and that the process of evaluation, selection and approval of the Virgin Atlantic proposal lacked merit, transparency, fairness and impartiality.

Christie was responding to Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Paula Llewellyn's announcement last Friday that there was nothing in his report on the sale of the slots to warrant prosecution of anyone involved at this time.

Christie had opened his probe in 2008 after the present Government requested that he investigate the sale of the London slots, in keeping with what it said was the need for transparency and accountability in the disposal of public assets.

The administration, which came to power in September 2007, had questioned the divestment of the slots by the previous People's National Party Government for £5.1 million (US$10.2 million).

The Office of the Contractor General (OCG), upon completion of its probe, referred the matter to Llewellyn for 'appropriate action'. The report charged, among other things, that Dr Davies had illegally and improperly intervened in the sale of the slots and that Virgin was placed in an unfairly advantageous position against rival bidder British Airways.

However, the DPP said that "having reviewed the report and its several documentary exhibits, there is no material revealed in the contractor general's report to support any consideration of any offence under the Corruption Prevention Act by any person in relation to this matter".

Davies in April this year denied that he had illegally or improperly intervened in the sale of the slots, as suggested by the OCG.

Llewellyn, however, did not rule on the contractor general's charges in respect of Davies and has referred the matter to the commissioner of police for further investigation.

"Given the nature of what was stated by Dr Omar Davies in his requisition to the Contractor General's Office when compared with the three letters signed by Dr Davies - all dated April 23, 2007 - the public interest would mandate that the matter be referred to the commissioner of police for further investigation in relation only to the possible breach of Section 29 (a) of the Contractor General Act by Dr Davies," the DPP said.

Llewellyn added that it was only after the completion of this investigation, with the necessary gathering of statements from individuals whose names will be subsequently indicated to the commissioner of police, that the prosecution will be put in an informed position to properly assess the sufficiency of evidence which may or may not ground a viable prosecution to the requisite standards as mandated by the criminal law.

"I am always cognisant of the fact that a set of circumstances which may be suspicious can fall short in the final analysis of the requisite high quality proof that the criminal law requires to sustain a viable prosecution," Llewellyn said further.

According to the DPP, for a prosecution to be effected the "evidence has to exist and be cogent, credible and reliable".

"If there is documentary evidence, the rules of evidence mandate that it can only be admitted into evidence through a witness who is competent so to do," she said. "If the evidence falls short of the required standard, then a prosecution cannot proceed and here again the public interest would have it no other way."

According to Section 29 (a) of the Contractor General Act, every person who:

a) wilfully makes any false statement to mislead or misleads, or attempts to mislead a contractor general shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction before a resident magistrate to a fine not exceeding $5,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both such fine and imprisonment.

Christie also disputed an article by the Gleaner which implied that his original assertions had been disturbed by the official findings and rulings of the DPP.

In the meantime, Christie said that despite the explanations from the Office of the DPP, the OCG is still not fully clear as to precisely what else is required for the Police to "investigate".

He also said he had a number of concerns with the DPP's findings and has written to her to seek clarification.

One such matter involved formal referrals made by the OCG to the DPP in respect of Dr Davies, former chairman of the board of directors of Air Jamaica OK Melhado, and former Air Jamaica director Senator Noel Sloley. According to Christie, the referrals were made on the basis of evidence contained in the sworn statements from the three to the OCG which would suggest
(a) that they attempted to mislead a contractor general, in contravention of Section 29 (a) of the Contractor General Act and/or,

(b) that they knowingly and wilfully made a false statement to a contractor general in a material particularly contrary to Section 8 of the Perjury Act.

"It appears, however, that the ODPP has failed to address any of the referrals which were made to it in respect of Mr OK Melhado and Senator Noel Sloley," Christie said yesterday. "Additionally, the ODPP also appears to have failed to address any of the referrals which were made to it in respect of the possible commission of the offence of perjury by the three respondents."

Should user fees at public health facilities be reinstated?
	Yes
	No

View Results
Results published weekly in Sunday Finance

Username:
Password: