Mr Robert Robinson
Office of the Integrity Commission
April 27th, 2018
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” – Edmund Burke
A self-explanatory and significant quotation which influences justifiable observation. Where are the “good men” in Grenada’s public service?
The level of appreciation your office has given to my complaint is far less than desirable. In your most recent response (April 20, 2018), you have noted the information I have sent your establishment to be insufficient which has in turn resulted (in) the failure of the Commission to consider my complaints fully.
What measurement of consideration does your office give to my complaint at present? May I remind you, in addition to the six (6) page detailed, emailed complaint (April 9th, 2018), I have also fulfilled your request of the audio recorded interview at your office (April 15th, 2018) for approximately two (2) hours; present were yourself and four (4) of your colleagues, at which time I had provided copies of the documents in my possession.
In referring to the said email, your opening statement was partially irrelevant and incorrect. Your choice of highlighting the organisations which I had “copied” to identify my correspondence with your office does seem embryonic particularly as there was a subject (Maitland). However, contrary to your statement, I had copied the Grenada Bar Association, an NGO and two (2) newspapers.
References to your letter:
Section 1: My case had been filed in the High Court in or around February 2017 to the best of my knowledge. I had appeared in court on the date I had stated in the detailed email which I have sent your establishment. I do not have a copy of the judgement.
Section 2: Although I have stated the exact sections of the Code of Conduct in the Integrity in Public Life Act, Grenada Employment Act and Ombudsman Act which have been violated by each stated public servant you continue to request it.
The complaint I have submitted to you has been broken up into five (5) parts for your understanding, as stated on page one (1) of my email by the following:
This complaint is made up of five (5) parts:
Minister of Labour
The Acting Attorney General
In each part, please observe the detailed, unethical and realistic events I, a citizen of Grenada, with rights, have unfortunately experienced at the antagonism of individuals who have infiltrated and compromised our public offices.
In addition please refer to the headings: “INTEGRITY IN PUBLIC LIFE ACT: Sixth Schedule Breaches” and prominent wordings: Section 82(1) and 8(1)(b),(f) and (g). In doing so I have no doubt you would see the irrelevance of section 2 in your letter.
**Please allow me to use this opportunity to make correction to the first paragraph of my complaint titled “Maitland”, “…which is contrary to Section 82(2). This was within the first four months of the year 2016.” Correction to be made “which is contrary to Section 82(3)…”
Section 3: I shall bring my copy of the Ombudsman’s letter dated January 31st, 2018 to your office.
In closing, I strongly urge you to re-think your position as to the abnormal requests made by your office to a layman in filing a warranted complaint in the interest of ensuring Grenada’s morality. Unnecessary complexity only delays justice and creates more victims.
Earl J. Maitland