Accountability group raises concerns over Wheatley remaining in Cabinet, says PM should act

There is a “glaring inconsistency” in de facto Science, Technology and Special Projects Minister Dr Andrew Wheatley’s failure to resign and Prime Minister Dr Andrew Holness’ failure to remove him from his Cabinet position pending the outcome of impending criminal charges, one civil society group has asserted.

The Jamaica Accountability Meter Portal (JAMP) made the assertion in a statement on Monday, hours after Holness indicated in a radio interview that Wheatley “retains my confidence in the work that he has been doing”.

The Director of Corruption Prosecution at the Integrity Commission (IC) has ruled that Wheatley, the Member of Parliament for St Catherine South Central, is to be charged with illicit enrichment and other corruption-related offences.

The ruling is based on the findings of a probe conducted by Kevon Stephenson, Director of Investigations at the IC, into Wheatley’s financial affairs and statutory declarations between 2011 and 2022.

The IC is Jamaica’s main anti-corruption body.

JAMP described the findings and recommendations of the IC as “among the most serious to have emerged to date from Jamaica’s integrity and anti-corruption framework”.

“JAMP believes that the seriousness of the referral for charges for illicit enrichment, alleged omissions from statutory declarations, and findings relating to failures to provide information requested by the Integrity Commission ... require an immediate and credible response that, at the very least, should demonstrate some standard that is consistent,” JAMP said.

The pro-accountability group also questioned what, if anything, Holness knew of the IC investigation involving Wheatley before appointing him to the Cabinet.

“Good governance requires more than technical competence. It must also engender trust and set a high bar for transparency.”

JAMP further asserted that the investigation report relating to Wheatley has exposed “significant weaknesses” in the country’s governance framework.

It noted, for example, that the Cabinet minister had been under investigation for four years at the time of his appointment last September.

According to JAMP, this raises questions about the standards and requirements that are considered in determining Cabinet appointments.

“It should be a requirement that, for Cabinet appointments, a candidate must disclose to the Prime Minister whether they are the subject of any integrity-related or other investigation,” JAMP suggested.

“The present situation cries out for urgent reforms to strengthen vetting.”