The Tribune

WHEN the police probe into allegations of corruption began after several voice notes were circulated, we wrote in this column of the need for transparency with regard to that investigation.

Since then, the probe has been proceeding – but in truth the transparency has not been as forthcoming as we might have hoped.

The probe itself reaches towards the top of the police force itself, and a senior officer has gone on gardening leave while that work is done.

There has been word of senior officers coming from the UK to play a role in the investigation – but after that visit was announced, it appears the officers have not arrived. Quite why that is or when they are now scheduled to join investigators here has not been expanded upon.

The announcement of an officer going on leave took place at the start of July. Since that time, a man suspected in a theft of $1.5m from a security car at an airport has been murdered. His family said he had been questioned by officers as part of the probe, and they said he had been warned by investigators not to talk to other police officers.

Another suspect in that case failed to show up at court for his latest hearing in the matter.

Two other men who appear on those leaked voice notes are also dead, each having been murdered. The voice notes feature a discussion between those two men, a senior officer and a lawyer.

The gravity of the accusations is such that former Prime Minister Dr Hubert Minnis has called for a commission of inquiry – while Foreign Affairs Minister Fred Mitchell warned has argued against such a move, and also warned Dr Minnis must not undermine the police force with his comments.

In this column, we have argued that holding individuals to account does not undermine an organisation – and transparency in that process reinforces the belief that an investigation is being carried out thoroughly.

FNM chairman Dr Duane Sands yesterday weighed in on the absence of updates on the investigation, saying that the investigation lacks the urgency and sincerity needed to maintain public trust.

This is exactly why we said at the outset that the public needs to see that this investigation is both transparent and being conducted with the highest importance.

Dr Sands said the public should not have to “beg” for updates on the investigation. He is right.

He said: ““We’ve made it very clear that this matter touches at the very heart of the democratic process and public confidence in the criminal justice system. We have not deviated from that position, and we believe that the urgency and the sincerity that this issue demands has been lacking and you know, there is nothing about this process over the last week or two that has done anything to increase public confidence.”

There is nothing to stop this concern from being turned around. A more forthright approach to updates, including on issues such as the timing and role of international investigators as part of the probe, would be a start.

But it may also be a matter of attitude. Being up front with the public about the progress of the investigation, and speaking out on each occasion about the importance of ensuring any possible corruption is stamped out, would encourage confidence in the police.

Silence does not. Rather that leads in the opposite path.