EDITORIAL - Cabinet and the Coke enquiry

We make no judgement on the suggestion, but it could be, as the information minister, Mr Daryl Vaz, implies, that the commissioners at the Christopher Coke extradition enquiry are allowing "grandstanding and point-scoring" to prolong the affair.

Mr Vaz's criticisms, like those of spokesmen of the governing Jamaica Labour Party (JLP), are, of course, aimed at the lawyers representing, broadly, the People's National Party (PNP), for the manner of their cross-examination of ministers and some other officials who have testified at the enquiry.

If, indeed, Mr Vaz, and others, have a compelling argument, it is up to the commission's chairman, Mr Emile George, QC, and his fellow commissioners to rein in the lawyers and bring greater efficiency to the proceedings.

However, we wish to remind about the fundamental aim of these hearings: Arriving at truth. The job of Mr George and Co, at its core, is to determine whether the Jamaican Government acted corruptly, with the aim of protecting a ruling party strongman, in the near yearlong fight against America's effort to extradite Coke to answer narcotics and gunrunning charges.

And that brings us to the central observation about Mr Vaz's statement at his briefing on Wednesday's meeting of the Cabinet.

Prime Minister Bruce Golding, when he acceded to public pressure and established the commission, initially mandated that it should complete its work this month and produce a report not long after. Clearly, this timetable can no longer be met, given the several witnesses who are still to testify, and the time it has taken to examine those who have already given evidence.

According to Mr Vaz, an application has already been made for an extension of the timeline of the commission, which is soon to be considered by the Cabinet, given its implication for funding.

That application, says Mr Vaz, will most likely be granted.

Mid-march ending

However, the information minister warned that it was unlikely that the Cabinet would entertain any further application if the hearings went beyond whatever time frame for their completion. He expects the hearings will end by mid-March.

Therein lies our problem: this signal by the minister of what is likely to be the posture of the administration should Mr George and his fellow commissioners, after an initial extension, ask for more time - and funding - to complete their work.

The priority of the commission is to arrive at the truth, and they should be allowed all reasonable facility to do so. Indeed, to signal what the Cabinet would not allow down the road is to put undue pressure for the kind of haste of which truth could be the casualty.

Such a position would not accord with good governance, for which, as Minister Vaz and others involved in the enquiry are well aware, the members of the Cabinet are collectively responsible.

The opinions on this page, except for the above, do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner. To respond to a Gleaner editorial, email us: editor@gleanerjm.com or fax: 922-6223. Responses should be no longer than 400 words. Not all responses will be published.