PANTRY and PATTERSONIN A rather surprising, if not unprecedented, move Prime Minister P.J. Patterson yesterday sent a letter to Kent Pantry, Q.C., Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), demanding that he present before Parliament information concerning the activities of his office.
Mr. Patterson's letter was in line with remarks made during his contribution to the 2004/2005 Budget Debate on Wednesday, where he noted that the Government may be ready to re-examine the constitutional powers given to the office of the DPP. He also pointed out that the DPP, currently, was subjected to the direction and control of no other person or authority.
"It is readily acknowledged that, in the exercise of the powers conferred on him by section 94 of the Constitution of Jamaica, the Director of Public Prosecutions is not subject to the control of any person or authority," Mr. Patterson wrote.
ACTIVITIES
"The Members of Parliament on both sides of the aisle are, however, of the view that information concerning the activities of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions should be presented to Parliament at timely intervals, preferably every quarter but at least once per year."
He continued: "You are no doubt aware that the Judiciary, even in the absence of any legal or constitutional requirement, has recently begun to provide Parliament with a report of their activities over stated periods. They were no doubt moved by the transparency, accountability and the process of development. I am strongly of the view that similar considerations would suggest that the course of action embarked upon by the Judiciary be emulated."
According to the Prime Minister, it was "in that light, I enjoin you to adhere to the view expressed by Parliament, whose members, like the Director of Public Prosecutions and all other public officials, are servants of the people."
The Office of the DPP has been hit with controversy, particularly over the last three years. However, it is the latest 'foul-up' where human rights groups, including Amnesty
International, have blasted the DPP over the handling of the Janice Allen case which has brought unto Mr. Pantry, a barrage of public criticism.
Police Constable Rohan Allen (no relation to the deceased), who was charged with manslaughter, was freed last month in the Portland Circuit Court after the Crown offered no evidence in the case. Thirteen-year-old Janice Allen was shot and killed in Trench Town in April 2000.
Mr. Pantry admitted last week that there was foul up in the case, stating that a prosecutor in his office had failed to follow standard procedures.
CRITICISM
However, Herbert McKenzie, Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions, smarting from Mr. Pantry's criticism, sent a letter on Thursday to the Attorney-General, rebutting Mr. Pantry's charges.
In other related matters concerning the DPP, the Public Service Commission appointed a committee in 2002 to conduct investigations into the administrative functions of that office after prosecutors complained about "the untenable state of affairs" there. Several recommendations were made by the Muirhead Committee which included the appointment of mediators for the office but to date the mediators have not been appointed.
