The Tribune

By RASHAD ROLLE

Tribune Staff Reporter

rrolle@tribunemedia.net

ATTORNEY Maurice Glinton, QC, believes the Minnis administration's purchase of the Grand Lucayan resort is unlawful.

In a recently written opinion piece, he described the purchase as evidence that the government's "decision-making process (or lack thereof) is critically impaired".

"By that," he noted, "I mean 'flawed' for not obviously being as informed as such process must be by views of proximate stakeholders consulted on the practicality and legality of an acquisition that will make The Bahamas government a licensee of Grand Bahama Port Authority Limited entitled to enjoy the benefits and privileges in virtue of the 1955 Hawksbill Creek Agreement and the subsequent 1960 and 1966 amended agreements, all statutory in nature as enabled by Acts of the Bahamian Parliament."

Mr Glinton argued that key government officials demonstrate a lack of curiosity and vigilance concerning the provisions of the Hawksbill Creek Agreement and its implications for public policy.

"Sound public and fiscal policies demand that the government avoid the mistakes which are bound to result from not having and following knowledge-based rather than emotionally driven decisions if attaining real long-term economic and political stability of the country are the objectives," he wrote.

"The government's purchase of the Grand Lucayan resort property will not achieve any such objectives, and not only because it is ultra vires and unlawful, but rather because, inexplicably, it is generally accepted and excused as such but rationalised around other more ephemeral principles. Nor is it another instance of bad public policy to which one is susceptible through simple indifference to, or intellectual laziness towards, disciplined research and analysis that will dictate the consequences of executing essential governmental functions and responsibilities under one's charge.

"Such instances are noteworthy rather because the decisions can often exact a high toll on the consolidated fund and citizens' pockets never shut to policy makers, and sometimes, regrettably, upon this nation's sovereignty. One should be apprehensive of the latter concern as a real possibility given some of the interests being served and the immense stakes involved."

Contacted by The Tribune yesterday, Mr Glinton said there is nothing the government could do to make its purchase of the resort legal.

"They can't be going into the consolidated fund to get money nor can they be borrowing money that they can guarantee the repayment of," he said. "This isn't just any transaction. This is a translation that violates the Hawksbill Creek Agreement."

Asked who would have standing in court to challenge the government's purchase of the resort, he said: "Nobody is thinking about litigation. Most people expect the government to respect the laws that they have made and you have a case such as this where what has happened is the government itself is breaching the law. The licensees have standing. The Port Authority ought to be protesting but they have long been able to co-opt the government through privileges in certain things and that's really how we find ourselves."

When contacted yesterday evening, Attorney General Carl Bethel said he will review Mr Glinton's commentary.