The Tribune

By AVA TURNQUEST

Tribune Chief Reporter

aturnquest@tribunemedia.net

ALTHOUGH his party has not released an official position, Free National Movement Deputy Leader K Peter Turnquest yesterday expressed support for the court ruling that Education Minister Jerome Fitzgerald could not be protected by parliamentary privilege when he tabled the personal emails of members of Save the Bays.

Mr Turnquest noted that while the court may not have jurisdiction in the matter, he believes that Parliament must do a better job at policing itself.

“I certainly support the principle of parliamentary privilege,” he said.

“Parliament ought to be free to speak with regard to issues that come up with respect to their constituency or matters that affect the government or legislation, and to be able to point out areas of wrong doing and corruption, etc.

“I draw the line, however, when persons’ private conversations are dragged into Parliament for no connected purpose other than to cast aspersions on the reputation of persons who don’t have the same right to defend themselves. In this particular instance the issues go way beyond reputation damage to the individual but potential damage to the country’s financial services industry.

“In as much as the court may not have jurisdiction in this matter,” he said, “I believe the Parliament itself must do a better job in policing itself in terms of what is allowed.”

When pressed for his party’s official position on the matter yesterday, FNM Leader Dr Hubert Minnis told reporters outside the House of Assembly that he had not yet been able to consider the matter.

In her landmark ruling earlier this month, Supreme Court Justice Indra Charles declared that Mr Fitzgerald was not legally justified when he tabled the private emails of environmental action group Save The Bays in Parliament, and therefore could not be protected by parliamentary privilege.

Justice Charles ruled that the Marathon MP’s actions were an infringement of the constitutional rights of the applicants and ordered Mr Fitzgerald to pay $150,000 in damages for the breach.

Mr Fitzgerald was permanently banned from disclosure and publication of any further material belonging to Save The Bays and was ordered to delete all electronic and hard copy material within 14 days of the ruling.

The Office of the Attorney General said that it would appeal the ruling and was granted a stay pending the appeal.

The following day, MPs reacted with outrage in the House of Assembly, with Mr Fitzgerald calling the ruling a “ridiculous conclusion.” But the most severe rebuke came from Marco City MP Greg Moss, who suggested that without Parliament’s “restraint” in addressing the matter, the ruling could lead to a constitutional crisis.

Mr Moss questioned whether Save the Bays was “forum shopping” given that it has had several of its cases before Justice Charles.

“Why are all these controversial cases coming before the same judge?” he asked, prompting parliamentarians to beat their desks in approval. “I’m not able to answer that. That should not be an issue I have to speak to in this House because the Supreme Court is supposed to conduct itself with judicial decorum not to create a constitutional crisis with the Parliament in this country.”

The comments were branded as an egregious insult by Save the Bays’ Legal Director Fred Smith, who pledged to make a formal complaint to the Office of the Attorney General and the Bar Association in an effort to get Mr Moss disbarred.

Bahamas Bar Association President Elsworth Johnson has said the matter shows that parliamentarians must not abuse parliamentary privilege, and cautioned parliamentarians to be responsible.

Outside parliament yesterday, House Speaker Dr Kendal Major said he did not take issue with Mr Moss’ comments but would have to review the transcript to make any further determination.

“The Parliament has its jurisdiction and exclusive cognisance, meaning that we are self-regulating,” Dr Major said. “So Parliament is minding its business and functioning as parliament should.”

When asked for his opinion on Mr Moss’ assertion, Mr Turnquest said: “I thought the comments were on the edge, but he (Mr Moss) being an officer of the court I thought he knew what he was doing. I was little uncomfortable with that.”