The Tribune

EDITOR, The Tribune

Allyson Maynard Gibson’s defence of the controversial Interception of Communications Bill lacks credibility as she states that the authority for it would be placed “solely in the hands of the Independent Judiciary”.

This is laughable as the government has openly shown their disdain, disrespect and disregard for the Judiciary by their recent attacks on sitting Supreme Court Justice Indra Charles for her rulings on Jerome Fitzgerald’s controversial tabling of private and personal emails in the House of Assembly under the guise of Parliamentary Privilege.

She opined that the Bill would be an important anti-crime tool, perhaps, if it were directed against the right group of criminals. The government’s mishandling of the Freedom of Information Act and their continued meddling in the administration of the Royal Bahamas Police Force does not instil confidence and, in my opinion, the bill if passed into law, would be subject to abuse by politicians using it as a tool for the victimisation of political opponents, private businesses and citizenry alike.

She also claimed that the Bill would enhance the privacy of citizens rather than encroach upon it. The question begs, considering the above, whose privacy would really be enhanced - the government’s or ours?

IAN MABON

Nassau,

February 14, 2017.