By Martin Tarusenga
In announcing the Government decision to set up a Commission of Inquiry to investigate whether pensioners were entitled correct benefits from pension and insurance contracts, Finance Minister Patrick Chinamasa declared in July 2014 that no parties with vested interests would be appointed as part of the final body of commissioners to drive the inquiry.
Further the minister also promised all stakeholders that the terms of reference to be used by the commission would be agreed by all stakeholders. There is no doubt the intention of these declarations was to guarantee the independence and impartiality of this commission.
To date however, apart from public concerns about unjustified long delays in setting this commission of inquiry, there are now public concerns about the impartiality and independence of this pending commission.
In its favour, the Finance Ministry reveals that interviews for shortlisted stakeholder proposed commissioners will commence within days. The Finance Ministry has however not fully answered several questions about the entire process of setting the commission, not least why the terms of reference to be used by the commission have not been agreed upon by all stakeholders, and how the commissioners were shortlisted.
A handbook on truth seeking recommends legitimacy as essential for a truth commission to be successful, and independence of the commission in all respects (operational, financial, political, etc) being of utmost importance in order for this legitimacy to be realised.
The latter independence can therefore be guaranteed if certain fundamentals are in place not least a transparent process for the appointment of commissioners; financial, administrative, and operational autonomy, legal guarantees that commissioners can only be removed for a just cause, among other fundamentals
No comments:
Post a Comment