Civil society groups are not interested in real accountability . Part One

I have long held the view that most of Jamaca’s civil society groups are political activist masquerading as the social conscience of the Jamaican society.

These groups continue almost on a weekly bias to lose the trust and confidence of the Jamaican people as they now seem to be getting desperate in their attempts to paint this administration as one that does not want to be held accountable and is corrupt.

Let’s look at their reaction to the Integrity Commission 2022/2023 annual report, where it was reported that fifty-two(52)  public officials ( i.e., people being paid by the public purse) are under investigation for illicit enrichment and or false information.

These civil society groups ignored the 46 members of the public officials and zeroed in on 6 politicians . Most members of the public have not read the Integrity Commission and are relying solely on the public release from civil society groups and would be under the impression that only 6 persons are under investigation.

Let’s think about this for a second, why should the 46 other people who are under investigation not be asked to step aside while the investigation is being conducted vs just the 6 politicians, who these groups perceive are members of the ruling party.

Let me spend a few minutes educating the public on several things, which shows why the focus really ought to be on the 46 and less so on the 6.

Let’s examine how politicians have in the past stolen money from the public purse for self-enrichment.

Public Contracts

Government spends billions of  dollars each year in public contracts as well as public procurement of goods and services, and this has been the way politicians in the past have been able to siphon off public funds from themselves.

Public capitals projects have been the  main access to funds by corrupt politicians , but this has all changed over the last 10 years or so.

Currently, it’s extremely difficult for any politician to influence and corruptly benefit from these massive public expenditures, which would have been the primary source for illicit benefits.

The politicians of today have virtually no access to public funds, but the same cannot be said for many public officials, who have significant access to public funds.

Many of these have direct access, via sourcing of goods and services, approval of purchase orders as well as invoices as well as the final payments, putting them in direct contact with billions of dollars of public funds.

Despite the above, we are being told,  “oh we really have no interest in those folks”, it’s the politicians we are after for illicit enrichment.  Clearly what we have at play is nothing but a ruse by civil society groups to try and influence the political process but pulling nothing short of a political coup and in so seeking to install the political party of their choice.

Why, do I say this. Well, the evidence is there for all to see, if the public officials have greater access to public funds as I have described above, the focus on illicit enrichment really ought to be targeted at those people, vs other without that level of access.

Having said that, why are we not seeing that and why is the public being led to believe its only 6 people who are under investigation.

Let’s go back and look at previous Integrity Commission annual reports , again something these groups have chosen to ignore for whatever reason.

To be continued in Part 2