Debate on a Bill to invest the nine-member Electoral Commission of Jamaica (ECJ) with the duties of the Office of the Political Ombudsman ahead of the looming local polls was stalled on Tuesday after Opposition members back-pedalled, citing new-found fears that it was too much of a gamble and would “injure” the reputation of the commission, which has gained respect for being non-partisan worldwide.

The proposal to amend the Political Ombudsman (Interim) Act, 2002 was largely the result of a motion originally moved in Parliament in November 2012 by Government Member of Parliament for St Catherine South Western Everald Warmington calling for the commissioners of the ECJ to assume the responsibilities of political ombudsman. The move was however delayed as there was, at the time, an appointee in the Office of the Political Ombudsman.

On Tuesday, Justice Minister Delroy Chuck, in piloting the provision, said with the office being vacant since November 15, 2022, its functions — in particular investigating complaints of misconduct or bias by political parties, its members or supporters — are not being carried out.

“It is an opportune time for the implementation of the proposed centralisation of services provided by the Office of the Political Ombudsman under the auspices of the ECJ, as the independence of the Office of the Political Ombudsman would be strengthened as a result of the expansion of the commission from one individual to the ECJ,” the justice minister argued.

“This approach will allow for a more fulsome examination of the matters brought to the Office of the Political Ombudsman, as matters will be scrutinised through the individual and collective lenses of the members of the ECJ, who are required to exercise fairness and who are bound by the Electoral Commission (Interim) Act to perform their functions within specified parameters. It is also anticipated that this amalgamation of functions will result in institutional and financial gains to the Office of the Political Ombudsman,” he stated.

He further said that the ECJ commissioners were in full support of assuming the functions and indicated in a letter addressed to him that they were “of the view that all commissioners should perform the functions of the political ombudsman”.

According to the commissioners, “the matters to be addressed by the ombudsman are primarily related to conduct. We believe that the full commission, including both selected and nominated commissioners, are best suited to address the nuances related to conduct and we strongly suggest that in this regard the commissioners shall be indivisible”.

Chuck, in noting that “the work of the political ombudsman usually reaches its zenith in the lead-up to elections, whether local government or general election”, said it was “therefore imperative that the political candidates sign the political code of conduct at the earliest opportunity after nomination day”.

But the parliamentary Opposition, led by Mark Golding, in a concerted pushback, voiced “misgivings” about the provision and the arrangement while chiding the Government for bringing the Bill without further consultation.

“We have not been sent a copy of this Bill, we are seeing it the first time it was tabled. I don’t know whether there are any errors… I don’t think this is ready. I don’t think it is a good idea. I cannot support it, the process is wrong… in principle. I think it is going down a dangerous route. I acknowledge that in the past we may have supported this idea, but with the passage of time and the discussions we have had, especially recently internally, we harbour grave concerns that this is not the right approach,” Golding said.

In noting that he was pained at having to raise the difference of opinion from the parliamentary floor, Golding said: “I cannot support this legislation, either…the process by which it got here. I think it is deeply flawed, it’s a dangerous approach, and it will not inure to the benefit of Jamaica’s electoral system.”

Opposition Member of Parliament for St Catherine Southern Fitz Jackson, in raising objections, said to place the functions of the political ombudsman on the ECJ risked ruining the unbiased approach of the commission.

“The ECJ deals with the operations, technicalities regarding elections, boundaries. We never had any problems with those for over 40 years and they have been done in a unbiased way and resolved without any rancour. Minister, that is an enormous achievement. Why are we risking it?” Jackson argued.

“On the other hand, the political ombudsman sought to deal with conduct of the political parties on either side or how we can restrain the conduct so that it preserves the political atmosphere. We know about the ECJ, what the political ombudsman office has been successful in doing is to keep those things out of the ECJ so it keeps the ECJ sterile of the cass cass [political mudslinging] and the comments that will injure the political environment,” Jackson said.

“What the minister is seeking to do with this Bill is to converge them with the risk of infecting the ECJ with the cuss cuss that comes through the office of the political ombudsman, that’s the danger, a major risk, it is not worth it,” Jackson contended while proposing a “pause” to enable both sides to come up with a suitable interim arrangement in consultation.

Opposition MPs Julian Robinson and Anthony Hylton, in labelling the proposition “risky”, said while the local government elections are due, rushing into the new arrangement could be a “fatal mistake” which could “damage the ECJ” in a way that may not recover.

The justice minister subsequently moved for the debate to be suspended “so that good sense can prevail until when we next meet”. However, he did not mince words in chastising the Opposition for its stance.

“Why would we discuss a matter when we have agreed in this Parliament that it should be subsumed?” he asked.

“It never happened in your time; when we took over we decided not to interfere because a political ombudsman was in place. So we waited until the term expired. All along we indicated it would happen and no one objected, all of a sudden, at the 11th hour, you object, why are you objecting at the 11th moment and you have never objected before?” Chuck demanded.

“The main objection is that the ECJ is an outstanding body praised by the world, and to put this simple act to them is going to taint them. With due respect to my colleagues on both sides, they undermine the strength of integrity and character of the members who sit on the ECJ to say that because they are going to adjudicate it will affect their independence,” Chuck said.

“We have had fulsome discussions with the ECJ, they have no difficulty taking on the role. I had discussions with them. The idea that these nine members, that their role could be tainted or affected and it would undermine the success they have achieved, with due respect is unmeritorious… We should be lucky, and we are lucky, that we have an ECJ with the stature, the trust and confidence of the Jamaican people. And I think when they undertake this role they will undertake it with integrity and fairness,” Chuck said in moving for the debate to be suspended.

The next local government election is constitutionally due by the end of February 2024.