The Tribune

• Alleges Gov’t sought to ‘punish’ her for exposures

• Failure ‘to ensure Bahamians got value for money’

• And leave tantamount to ‘constructive dismissal’

By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

A top civil servant is alleging the Government violated the Freedom of Information Act’s ‘whistleblower’ protections by “intimidating” and sidelining her after she sought to highlight purported “wrongdoing”.

Antoinette Thompson, permanent secretary in the then-Ministry of Transport and Housing until she was placed on “unrecorded leave” in April 2023, is now seeking “exemplary” and “aggravated” damages for alleged breaches of that law and the Public Finance Management Act after the Government sought to “punish” her for drawing attention to alleged “clear acts of public misfeasance”.

In her amended legal action, filed with the Supreme Court on December 22, 2023, the public official of 42 years’ standing is alleging that a “breach of duty” was not only committed towards her but the taxpayer due to the failure to scrutinise multi-million dollar contract awards “to ensure that the Bahamian public was receiving value for money”.

Asserting that she could have faced “penal punishment” for the alleged breaches of public service protocols and procedures within the then-ministry, Ms Thompson is claiming she was subjected to an “orchestrated” campaign “to silence her from further ‘whistleblowing’ on the various infractions” purportedly occurring within the Ministry of Transport and Housing.

This, she added, involved Nicole Campbell, the Cabinet secretary, placing her on “unrecorded leave” after Jobeth Coleby-Davis, minister of transport and housing, branded the working relationship with Ms Thompson as “untenable”. The latter, though, is alleging that “unrecorded leave” is not defined in any of the civil service regulations and, as such, amounted to a breach of her employment contract.

And the former permanent secretary is claiming that a June 2023 meeting with Prime Minister Philip Davis KC and Ms Campbell, rather than addressing “her genuine concerns of the numerous infractions” at the ministry, saw “scathing allegations” levied against her including that she had a problem with “alcoholism” - something Ms Thompson is strenuously denying.

She alleged that the meeting left her feeling “pressured, coerced and intimidated”, and that the allegations against her were made to “stifle” both her concerns about other officials’ actions and prevent her from acting as the Ministry of Transport and Housing’s chief accounting officer (its chief financial officer).

Ms Thompson is now claiming that the alleged effort to “silence” her, and “interfere with her employment contract” by being placed on leave, represents a breach of the Freedom of Information Act’s section 47, which is designed to protect whistleblowers from any kind of retribution for exposing wrongdoing. This newspaper’s records show this section of the Act was brought into effect in March 2018.

The former permanent secretary is now, in her amended claim, seeking a Supreme Court declaration that the Government defendants’ actions were tantamount to “intimidation and done to punish her” for exposing “infractions” within the ministry, thus amounting to a breach of that Act.

And she is also claiming that their actions violate the Public Finance Management’s section 16, which deals with “objection to direction”. This gives public officials protection from disciplinary or retaliatory measures if they have a legitimate concern about being ordered to take, or refrain, from a particular action and sets out the processes for submitting a complaint and seeking redress.

Among the defendants are the Prime Minister; Mrs Coleby-Davis, now-minister of transport and energy; Ms Campbell in her capacity as Cabinet secretary; Gina Thompson, permanent secretary in the Ministry of Public Service; Gaynell Rolle, under-secretary in the Ministry of Transport and Housing; and Dr Donna Miller, Cabinet Office under-secretary who has been assigned to the Ministry of Transport and Energy.

This newspaper previously reported how the contracts at the centre of the battle are two multi-million dollar maritime awards.

They are the $3.355m granted to DigieSoft Technologies for the development of an online portal to capture the 4 percent yacht charter fee due to the Port Department, as well as the annual $3.57m award to Adolpha Maritime Group for the maintenance of navigational aids in Nassau and other harbours across The Bahamas.

Both were cited by Ms Thompson for procedural irregularities, as she alleged that the DigieSoft contract was signed by Ms Rolle, in her capacity as the Ministry of Transport and Housing’s under-secretary, prior to all the necessary documents arriving at the ministry’s offices. The Adolpha deal was also signed by Ms Rolle, this time as “acting permanent secretary”.

Ms Thompson reiterated in her amended claim that she, as the ministry’s chief accounting officer, was the only person with the lawful authority to sign-off on both contracts and thus ensure they are legally binding. She alleged, though, that unknown to her Ms Rolle “continued to wield an invalid power as she continued to give directives in the ministry” in violation of the Cabinet manual and ministry procedures.

The senior official, though, claimed that when she approached Mrs Coleby-Davis about Ms Rolle “acting beyond her respective scope of power”, the minister purportedly “alluded that the fifth defendant [Ms Rolle] was following her instructions despite those instructions being in contravention of the established regulations and procedures and clear acts of public misfeasance”.

Ms Thompson alleged that she also had to deal with “excessive spending” by the Government’s chief housing officer, Oral Lafleur, who had “negligently executed contracts” that had exhausted 92 percent of the department’s budget within the fiscal year’s first seven months.

And she is also alleging that her role as the ministry’s chief accounting officer was “systematically usurped” by Mrs Coleby-Davis and Ms Rolle, with the latter seemingly having “directed changes to the budgetary allocations of the various departments without her knowledge”.

After these budgetary changes were exposed in a meeting with Simon Wilson, the Ministry of Finance’s financial secretary, Ms Thompson alleged she “immediately informed” Mrs Coleby-Davis of what had occurred and urged her “to set a tone of compliance with the relevant procedures and regulations”.

“Despite the claimant’s advice, the second defendant [Mrs Coleby-Davis] did nothing to address the behaviours of [Ms Rolle] or the chief housing officer,” Ms Thompson alleged. She claimed that this amounted to “a breach of duty owed to” both herself “and the Bahamian public, and are clearly acts of public misfeasance and were performed lacking lawful authority”.

Besides alleged breaches in the protocols and regulations for awarding government contracts, and claiming the DigieSoft and Adolpha awards involved “unlawful execution”, Ms Thompson alleged that there was also a failure “to ensure that awarded contracts were scrutinised to ensure that the Bahamian public was receiving value for money”.

Suggesting she could have been subjected to “penal punishment” for failing to report these issues, the former permanent secretary alleged that when she did she was subjected to a “series of systematic attacks” that saw her placed on leave and her reputation smeared via Internet outlets and social media channels linked to the governing Progressive Liberal Party (PLP).

Asserting that she was placed on “unrecorded leave” in April 2023, one month after she “brought to [Mrs Coleby-Davis] attention several glaring oversights relating to government contracts issued from the Ministry of Transport and Housing, Ms Thompson argued this breached the Freedom of Information Act’s section 47.

This stipulates that “no person may be subject to any legal, administrative or employment related sanction, regardless of any breach of a legal or employment-related obligation, for releasing information on wrongdoing, or that which would disclose a serious threat to health, safety or the environment, as long as he, acting in good faith, and in the reasonable belief that the information was substantially true and disclosed evidence of wrong-doing or a serious threat to health, safety or the environment.”

Among the wrongdoing covered by these protections is “failure to comply with a legal obligation” or “corruption, dishonesty, or serious maladministration”. Ms Thompson is also alleging that she was “arbitrarily” placed on leave in breach of General Orders 1110, which governs the civil service, and stipulates that all disciplinary proceedings for public officers by governed by Public Service Commission regulations.;

The former Ministry of Transport and Housing permanent secretary is alleging that, as a result of being placed on “unrecorded leave”, she has been “constructively dismissed” and is claiming for loss of current and future earnings plus pension rights and loss of employment.

As for the June 2023 meeting with the Prime Minister and Ms Campbell, which was also attended by David Davis, permanent secretary in the Prime Minister’s Office, Ms Thompson alleged: “During the course of the meeting, it became clear to the claimant that the purpose of the meeting was not to address her genuine concerns of the numerous infractions occurring in the Ministry of Transport and Housing or her improper placement on ‘unrecorded leave’, but rather to intimidate her into silence....”

Several “scathing allegations” were made to justify her being placed on leave, including alcoholism, but Ms Thompson said no proof was provided to support these and she was not given an opportunity to address them. She was told they had made an appointment for her to have a psychiatric assessment, and was to remain on leave until this happened.

“The defendants knew, or ought to have known, that the claimant was not suffering alcoholism as the claimant’s various performance evaluations and work ethic over 42 years of public service speaks for themselves,” Ms Thompson’s claim added.

“At all material times during the said meeting, the claimant felt pressured, intimidated and coerced by the first and third defendants [the Prime Minister and Ms Campbell] to attend the assessment or remain on ‘unrecorded leave’ without any information as to who made the said allegations or of any evidence provided to the defendants concerning the said allegation.”

She alleged that the allegations, and assessment, appeared designed to “stifle her from fulfilling her role as the chief financial officer within the Ministry of Transport and Housing and silence her in relation to the infractions.... within the Ministry of Transport and Housing”.