Further submission from Eric W George, Speaker of the Legislative Council, Island of St Helena, 12 October 2007

Former Chairman Building Authority

Commission of Enquiry

1. I wish to advise the Foreign Affairs Committee of a serious and unaccounted-for injustice suffered in the Overseas Territory of St Helena that was instigated by the Queen's Representative and was allowed to rest until now, when the opportunity has arisen through this enquiry to submit evidence on good governance in Overseas Territories.

2. I wish it to be known that in 1997, as a Member of Executive Council, I was summoned by the then Chief Secretary and Acting Governor of St Helena, Mr Perrott, to be told that he was considering commissioning an inquiry into alleged impropriety in the operation of the Building Ordinance.

3. At that time, I was chairman of the Building Authority, the body responsible for enforcing compliance with the Building Ordinance. I believe that Mr Perrott acted out of malice towards me, and that setting up the commission was a deliberate attack on my integrity. Particularly in a small community, any attack on the actions of a statutory body is seen as an attack on the actions of its members and on its Chairman in particular.

4. The Acting Governor advised me that he had received a complaint from a dissatisfied member of the public, which he intended to investigate. When I asked him to show me the letter of complaint, he refused. When I sought independent legal advice to defend my position, it was denied. All I wanted was proper advice, and it was entirely wrong for the Acting Governor to deprive me of the opportunity to obtain it.

5. I told Mr Perrott that if due process were not followed in conducting the investigation, in accordance with the principles of natural justice and according to law, he would be undermining the Building Authority and the judicial process, and acting ultra vires, constituting a misfeasance in public office. There is an Appeals Board appointed by the Governor under the Building Ordinance to which the complaint should have been forwarded.

6. He nevertheless insisted he would conduct the inquiry as Acting Governor and a Gazette notice was issued, advertising the appointment of a Commission Board to inquire into the above.

7. I seriously believe this action was a deliberate attempt to silence and discredit me in the eyes of the public because of my efforts to address the financial shortcomings of the Island's economy through the judicial review process. This refers to my attempts to establish whether the British Government and the Island were getting value for money, and my criticism of the British Government for not taking into account of, and making proper provision for, the reasonable needs of the Island when imposing the Grant-in-Aid figure for St Helena. In particular, I believe the Acting Governor used his position of privilege to protect himself and other officers from embarrassment, which can never be justified.

8. Evidence of the Acting Governor's actions is submitted as an example of the lack of good governance on the Island at that time. It was wholly unjustifiable and unlawful to allow an inquiry of this kind, involving allegations of impropriety concerning a member of Executive Council, to take place in violation of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the right to a fair trial) and without regard to several of the fundamental principles of natural justice, viz:

· A person accused, or at risk of some form of loss (in this case myself, as Chairman of the Building Authority), must be given adequate notice about the proceedings and the nature of any charges or accusations

· A person who makes a decision (in this case the Acting Governor in commissioning the inquiry) should be unbiased and act in good faith. He therefore can not be one of the parties in the case, or have an interest in the outcome. This is expressed in the latin maxim, nemo judex in sua causa: "no man is permitted to be judge in his own cause".

· Proceedings should be conducted so they are fair to all the parties - expressed in the latin maxim audi alteram partem: "let the other side be heard". In this case, attempts were made to deny my right to access independent legal advice. (I only secured such advice after bringing proceedings before the Chief Justice of the St Helena Supreme Court, despite these proceedings being opposed by the then Attorney General on behalf of the Acting Governor - see attached Judgment).

· Each party to a proceeding is entitled to ask questions and contradict the evidence of the opposing party. (This can only be done if the other party's evidence is made known, which was denied in this case).

9. At no point did I claim to be exempt from, or above, the law or due process. The Commission Board was well placed to deal with any such complaint. As a result of their independent investigation into the alleged complaint, they found no evidence whatsoever to substantiate the alleged complaint and concluded that there was no case to answer (see attached Report).

10. I requested that the public should be made aware of the Commission's findings by notice in the Government Gazette in the same way as the Acting Governor's inquiry was first published, but this was refused.

11. Unfortunately, my wife and family were put under considerable stress because of my having been summoned to attend a hearing. My wife never recovered from the shock of me being publicly and unfairly pilloried in this way. I consequently claimed for damages of £2,000 for the pain, distress and suffering caused as a result of the inquiry and the manner in which it was convened. Neither the findings of the commission nor the claim for damages were granted or even considered. I had no satisfaction from the St Helena Government for their malicious attack on my character and the consequences caused to my family, and I was once again denied access to justice.

12. My reason in bringing this to the attention of the Committee, is to ensure that similar situations are not allowed to occur again in this Territory, whereby members of the public or indeed Councillors are penalised for carrying out their lawful duties, and where individuals are free to address and challenge serious issues of financial inadequacy without fear or favour. Our situation today, some ten years later, reveals how little the Island has progressed during that time.

13. I request that the Committee be good enough to consider the case outlined above in the interest of democracy and Good Governance with a view of not allowing such incidents to occur ever again. I look forward also to the possibility of my claim for damages being considered and awarded.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION

(a) To address this issue in the light of stifling democracy and upholding justice, human rights and the rule of law.

(b) To make sure as far as possible occurrences of this nature are not allowed to undermine the Good Governance of the Island of St Helena.