Memorandum submitted by Mrs Jennifer Caines, Bermuda

Thank you for this opportunity to share my observations and concerns of two different agencies in Bermuda which were specifically put in place to administer and enforce existing Acts. Those agencies are The Human Rights Commission (HRC) and the Ombudsman for Bermuda.

The Human Rights Commission in Bermuda operates under the direction of the Minister in charge. The one who oversees the day to day operation of the Department is the Executive Officer and there are a few Investigating Officers and clerks who assist.

The Human Rights Commissioners are appointed by the Governor, on the advice of the Premier, after consultation with the Leader of the Opposition. The staff of the HRC are public Officers. The expenses of the Commission are met out of funds appropriated annually by the legislation.

Although all persons lawfully residing in Bermuda are entitled to equality, dignity and freedom from acts of discrimination on various grounds, and are supposed to be protected from reprisal acts if they do complain to the HRC, there is one particular case that comes to mind which was not handled fairly.

My husband, Mr. Ahmed-Troy Caines is a Civil Servant with the Bermuda Government and is prevented from speaking publicly. I, however, am a former civil servant and I have seen first hand how these agencies operate and how policies and procedures are disregarded.

In my view, what I see happening is that the process is merely an information gathering opportunity for these agencies to navigate around complaints against the Bermuda Government.

When there's a policy of Bermudianization which clearly states that qualified Bermudians will be hired over non-Bermudians (persons who are not Bermudian) and the Bermudian applicants are told that based on their resumes, they are considered unsuitable and the Bermuda Government then hires a Canadian who is even less qualified, who was considered suitable although she lacked the required qualifications, then that to me should have been viewed as discrimination. Instead the process is changed in the midst of the investigation, thus allowing changes to be made that benefit the government's position. Barrier exams have been introduced to block the path of the complainant. This happens even though the HRC claims that the investigation will be objective, confidential and fair, and that there are to be no reprisal acts against the complainant.

Even though it is also stated that obstruction of an HRC investigation is unlawful, a fiat was issued by the Governor preventing evidence from being used at the hearing.

If the investigating officer had taken note to examine the policies and procedures which were in place at the time the complaint was lodged, the matter would have been settled at that level and should not have escalated into a hearing, not to mention the appeal stage.

The Human Rights process in Bermuda is just a process to cover-up wrongdoing to prevent exposing the bad practices which are being allowed, especially those complaints involving Bermuda Government officials.

The introduction of the position of Ombudsman for Bermuda gave the impression that they were about good governance, however, having personally submitted a complaint to the Ombudsman uncovered a one sided investigation. Again, this process should have been rectified at this stage but the Ombudsman informed me via telephone and in writing that she saw no maladministration on the part of the government officials involved. I have since which proven her wrong and she has made no attempts to apologize to me for the inconvenience caused or attempt to rectify the situation.

This complaint involved the actions of a lawyer who ranks # 4 on the Bermuda Bar Association's list of seniority who holds The Bermuda Bar Act 1974 Practising certificate 2008. Owing to the seniority of this lawyer, it appears that other lawyers are reluctant to deal with one of their fellow members of the legal fraternity, especially from this particular law firm as the senior lawyer serves on some of the government boards. This same consultant lawyer works for the law firm which represented the Bermuda Government officials in the most recent gag order case which the media took to the Privy Council and won. The Honorary Secretary of the Bermuda Bar Association also works at this law firm.

A letter expressing the senior lawyer's opinion was submitted to a government board as fact when its true purpose was to circumvent the usual process of requiring my consent as an adjoining landowner of her clients. The fact that they accepted this information over the legal document that I provided them with is questionable. If there's a code of conduct for Barristers and Attorneys in place, and considering the fact that this senior lawyer provided erroneous information to the government board without providing legal documents to support her claim, why did the Ombudsman for Bermuda not recognize this?

If the Foreign Affairs Committee can assist me in finding answers to these questions upon visiting Bermuda to conduct this study, then my confidence in the agencies mentioned, which are there to protect the rights of citizens, would be restored.

31 January 2008