Justice Minister Delroy Chuck says he has advised Members of Parliament (MPs) not to divulge the salaries of their spouses or children to the Integrity Commission (IC) during the course of its investigations.

He also wants limits to be placed on the IC in terms of what it can and cannot investigate.

Chuck made the admission on Tuesday during a brief meeting of Parliament’s Integrity Commission Oversight Committee. He regards such information as the personal business of spouses or children.

According to Chuck, some MPs have asked him if it is right for the IC to be requesting information regarding the salaries of their spouse and children.

“Why is the Integrity Commission asking members to indicate the salaries of their spouse or sometimes of their children? I don’t know if this is something that is appropriate, because I have advised the relevant members, let them know your spouse is not prepared to divulge their salary,” he said, adding that by doing so the MPs are not able to share the information.

“These are things that when we get back to the legislation we have to make it very clear what limits can be put in terms of investigations,” Chuck added.

The legislation, which is under review, speaks to the issue Chuck finds offensive.

Section 40 (1) of the Integrity Commission Act states “A statutory declaration shall include such particulars as are known to the declarant of the income, assets and liabilities of the spouse and children, where applicable, of the declarant.”

The justice minister said he was well aware that the IC, during the course of an investigation, asks for information from banks, companies, the Registrar of Titles, among other entities.

“I know that because they brought up companies that my name was on which were formed 30 years ago, which I totally forgot about, but they found it in the register of companies,” he said, adding that the companies, which are closed, never operated.

“We need to find out just how far the Integrity Commission goes in terms of investigating,” he said.

Meanwhile, Chuck again took issue with the fact that, nearly two years on, the IC is yet to indicate which six parliamentarians were under probe for illicit enrichment. That number rose to eight when two more were mentioned last year in the IC’s annual report.

The IC has confirmed only one illicit enrichment probe to date in relation to Prime Minister Dr Andrew Holness.

That matter is now before the court after Holness challenged the investigation report into his finances.

The IC made mention of its illicit enrichment probes in consecutive annual reports, a decision Chuck finds troubling.

“First of all, I don’t think that it was appropriate to put that in the annual report. You investigate and then report; don’t report that you’re investigating. That’s why Section 53 is there in the [Integrity Commission] Act,” Chuck said.

Section 53 of the Act is commonly referred to as the gag clause which prohibits the IC from commenting on its investigations before the findings are tabled in the Parliament.

“I don’t think it is fair for parliamentarians that it should be there hanging out whether the investigation is still continuing, whether one or two have been exonerated, or whether all eight are still being investigated. Since you have reported it, let us know,” said Chuck.

He insisted that it is unfair to parliamentarians who are under a cloud of suspicion and as such the IC should quickly indicate what is happening with the so-called illicit eight.

“I will repeat, again and again, we want the Integrity Commission to succeed, we want corruption to be removed from every layer in this country, but I’m a little concerned that we’re not getting reports that reduce the perception of corruption; we’re getting reports that seem to highlight and expand and increase the perception of corruption when in all sincerity one doesn’t see it there,” the justice minister said.

Committee member Julian Robinson, in responding to Chuck, said: “I don’t think we can categorise it as unfair when the Integrity Commission is simply reporting on its work.”