Too often journalists, including myself, tend to highlight the contentious aspects of issues and ignore the harmonious sides. This is not anything new. It was prevalent during my early years of journalism long ago and exists to a large extent today. It was therefore most heartening to see the co-operation and objectivity of the governing Jamaica Labour Party and the People’s National Party in the recent debate on the legislation concerning Corruption Prevention.

The legislation seeks to promote and strengthen measures for the protection, prevention, investigation and prosecution of corrupt conduct; provide for the offence of corrupt conduct and offences relating to corrupt conduct; provide for the establishment of a commission of Parliament to be known as the Office of Special Prosecutor for Corruption with special responsibility for the detection and prevention of corruption; investigation and prosecution of corrupt conduct; repeal of the Corruption (Prevention Act) and Parliament (Integrity of Members) Act and for connected matters.

The functions of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, the state’s chief prosecutor, will not be affected by the special prosecutor under the new legislation. The legislation states that for the avoidance of doubt nothing in the Act affects the functions of the director of public prosecutions under section 94 of the Constitution. Incidentally, the DPP and the Independent Commission of Investigation settled their difference as to which organisation will prosecute in a classic example of co-operation when it was agreed that the DPP will take on this task.

Opposition Senator, Queen’s Counsel AJ Nicholson, made a solid contribution to the debate on the special prosecutor legislation. He said that the report of the Joint Select Committee presents to the public a prime example of what consultation and collaboration can achieve within the democratic process. Nicholson who did valuable work at the committee stage said, “We are therefore persuaded that this new and adventurous path that is being taken can bear rich dividends.” He congratulated the government for the initiative.

I read Prime Minister Bruce Golding’s contribution to the debate. It was statesman-like, eloquent and forthright. The legislation provides that people who directly or indirectly engage in a corrupt practice commit an offence and are liable to the following:

* on summary conviction in a Resident Magistrate’s Court to a fine not exceeding $1 million or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or both.

* on conviction in a Circuit Court to a fine or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or both.

The punishment seems severe, but we have to realise and appreciate the harm.

Corruption is widespread and is committed by all classes and many businesses in the country. It is damaging the country badly.

A public official commits an offence, directly or indirectly, for himself or another person in the performance of his public functions, if he corruptly solicits or accepts an undue advantage or performs or refrains from performing his public functions for the purpose of obtaining and undue advantage. A person also commits an offence if he, directly, promises, offers or gives to a public official, any undue advantage in order that the public official in the performance of his functions, abuses his real or supposed influences or performs or refrains from performing an act.

The punishment: on summary conviction in a Resident Magistrate’s Court a fine not exceeding $1 million or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or both. Or conviction in a Circuit Court a fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or both.

The legislation went on to state that a person shall not, directly or indirectly, promise, offer or give to a foreign public official or an official of a public international organisation, any undue advantage in order that the official performs or refrains from performing his official functions. A person who contravenes this section commits an offence and is liable, on summary conviction in a Resident Magistrate’s Court, to a fine not exceeding $1 million or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or both; on conviction in a Circuit Court to a fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or both. There are many more offences in the legislation and it is now for the government to have a service-wide public education programme and make copies of the relevant Acts available to departments and ministries.

Warmington wants company in hell?

Everald Warmington, the Jamaica Labour Party politician, should have been man enough to apologise to Kerlyn Brown, CVM news anchor, instead of hiding it in a joint letter with Dr Alfred Sangster of University of Technology fame.

It may be recalled that when Brown asked Warmington a pertinent question during an interview, he told her “to go to hell”.

On reflection it seems to me that Warmington was probably seeking company for the journey or at least hoping to meet her there. But I have news for him.

Kerlyn, whom I have known for a long time, does not appear bound for hell.

Japan will rise again

The death toll in Japan from the recent earthquake and tsunami has risen to 10,000, with 17,000 missing. The nuclear reactor problem is still being keenly watched.

I have a close relation with Japan, having been a member of the Jamaica-Japanese Friendship Association and toured the country some years ago when I visited a nuclear reactor.

I should like to express deep condolence to the people of Japan. The country rose from destruction at the end of World War II in 1945 to become a great economic power. With the discipline and hard work of the Japanese, I am sure that over time the country will rise again. Their national flag depicts the rising sun.