Director

of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Paula Llewellyn last week went to great lengths to explain the difference between having an opinion that something is corrupt, and providing evidence of that corruption.The DPP’s press statement was a stinging rebuke to the former Contractor General Greg Christie and others who criticised the Office of the DPP (ODPP) for its alleged failure to prosecute some 40 referrals that were sent to her by the Office of the Contractor General (OCG).The critics include Professor Munroe of National Integrity Action (NIA) and Caribbean Policy Research Institute, a research think tank, she said.“These referrals were forwarded to the ODPP during the tenure of the former contractor general, Mr Greg Christie, who submitted official reports to Parliament and issued public statements mischaracterising the nature of these referrals, and criticising the posture of the ODPP in its decision not to prosecute these matters,” Llewellyn said.The DPP, in pointing out the difference between what are often administrative breaches and real corruption cases, made it clear that:“An administrative breach is where there has been a failure to observe or comply with a procedural requirement. On the other hand, cases involving corruption usually disclose some ingredient of impropriety, fraud, or dishonesty as a matter of law… Corruption files usually contain statements gathered, after an investigation has been conducted, disclosing clear breaches of the criminal law, example illicit enrichment under The Corruption Prevention Act, conspiracy to defraud, offences under the Forgery Act and the Larceny Act, to name a few.”She said that if the referrals were analogous to offences under the Road Traffic Act, the corruption cases would be akin to the offence of causing death by dangerous driving or equivalent to the offence of disobeying a stop sign.There is nothing we love more in Jamaica than scandals, the more salacious the better; and there is nothing we hate more than when these scandals do not pan out. In other words, we do not like to be disturbed or confused by the facts. Very little consideration is given to the fact that we are tarnishing the character of the people we so easily label as corrupt, without any justification in law.Two current cases come to mind, both of which prove that Miss Llewellyn is absolutely correct in the principled position she has taken:• The first relates to Mr Danville Walker. Your newspaper might be uncomfortable about publishing this, but I beg your indulgence because it proves my point. While Mr Walker was commissioner of customs, he was accused by the OCG of not complying with an order to supply certain information in regards to scrap metal exports while a ban was on. He missed the OCG’s deadline by six days. That would be an administrative breach that was also referred to the ODPP.“Since the publication of the May 2015 report to Parliament, Mr Danville Walker was successfully prosecuted by officers of the ODPP for ‘Failure to Comply’ with the lawful requisition of the contractor general and was fined the maximum $5000 or 14 days,” Llewellyn reported. In other words, an administrative breach that could happen to anyone.Still, despite the absence of anything suggesting that corruption was involved, there has been a chorus of voices calling for Mr Walker to be dropped from all State boards where he is serving the people of Jamaica. This is like banning someone from ever driving again because he/she was fined for exceeding the speed limit. It’s ridiculous and we need to put a stop to this.• The second case is that of Mr Karl Samuda, which the OCG is investigating but has not yet referred to the ODPP. The Member of Parliament is accused of benefiting from State-owned Mombasa grass which was planted on his private property.It was made clear that Mr Samuda’s offer to pay for the grass for testing was initially refused by the Dairy Board. He went ahead anyway, believing that his property provided the size necessary for effective tesing of the grass, against the five acres being used by other participants in the project.The scandals-lovers cried foul and the OCG entered the picture. The usual chorus is again calling for Mr Samuda’s resignation or dismissal, even before any evidence of corruption is provided. This is, yet again, another administrative breach.Miss Llewellyn provided a long list of cases that proved to be administrative breaches which the OCG had referred, some as corruption cases — including high-profile ones pertaining to Richard Azan; Derick Kellier; Shernett Haughton of the Hanover Parish Council; Patrick Wong of the National Works Agency; Clifford Warmington of Strathairn Construction Company; the Cabinet of Jamaica; and the Jamaica Urban Transit Company.After the scandal- lovers had had their fun and the people’s names and reputations were dragged through the mud, it was proved that no corruption was involved.Persons, like Dr Munroe, who are quick to point the finger at others should set an example by issuing their tax returns and stating the source of their funding for organisations like the NIA. That would put them on the same level as the people they are accusing.I give the last word to the DPP: “Again I wish to emphasise that these forty-odd referrals from the OCG are not corruption cases. They are administrative breaches which do not disclose any allegations of any ingredient of any corruption offence. For certain entities, as reflected in the news media, to continue to mischaracterise these referrals as corruption cases, reflects an intention by them to mislead the public, both local and foreign, and I would call on these persons to cease and desist from pursuing this disingenuous practice.”