Justice Minister rejects MP Lewis call for independent review of Police Chief Carl John Acting SG role

GREAT BAY--The Minister of Justice has rejected a call from the Nation Opportunity Wealth, NOW, faction for an independent review of Chief of Police Carl John’s temporary designation as Acting Secretary-General of the Ministry of Justice, stating that assigning the acting duties was a ministerial prerogative exercised within the applicable legal framework.

The questions were submitted by Member of Parliament Lyndon Lewis on behalf of the NOW faction as part of Parliament’s examination of Budget 2026.

Lewis asked the Minister to commit to an independent review of John’s temporary role in the interest of transparency and public confidence. The Minister responded that John was not appointed to a separate function, but was temporarily entrusted with acting responsibilities during the absence of the substantive Secretary-General.

The Minister said the temporary assignment of acting duties falls within the authority of the Minister and described it as a ministerial prerogative exercised in accordance with the applicable legal framework. She maintained that the arrangement forms part of the ordinary administration of the Ministry and does not require external validation to be legitimate.

According to the Minister, that does not place the arrangement beyond scrutiny. She pointed to ministerial responsibility to Parliament, parliamentary oversight and legal recourse available to affected parties as the appropriate accountability mechanisms.

The Minister therefore said she does not consider an independent review necessary and does not intend to commit to one, maintaining that transparency and public confidence are adequately served through existing accountability mechanisms.

In explaining how John came to perform the role, the Minister said the Head of the Financial Intelligence Unit was initially designated Acting Secretary-General. Because of significant operational demands, the responsibility was later transferred to John to maintain continuity within the Ministry during the Secretary-General’s absence.

The Minister explained that Acting Secretary-General is not a separate function and therefore does not require publication of a vacancy or a formal selection procedure. Temporary acting responsibilities are generally assigned to senior officials with the operational knowledge and management experience necessary to maintain oversight of the Ministry.

The Minister also pointed out that department heads have served in the role previously, including the heads of the Financial Intelligence Unit and Immigration Department. She said selecting a department head to temporarily carry out SG responsibilities is therefore neither new nor unusual.

Lewis also questioned why John would continue occupying the Acting SG position after Secretary-General Florence Marlin returned to work. The Minister clarified that John ceased exercising the Acting Secretary-General responsibilities once Marlin resumed her duties.

Marlin initially returned under a 50 percent working arrangement, but according to the Minister, she nevertheless resumed the responsibilities and authority attached to the Secretary-General position. John’s responsibilities therefore reverted fully to his substantive role as Chief of Police.

The Minister explained that when John is off island or otherwise unable to perform his duties as Chief of Police, Chief of the Detective Department Delano Baptist serves as Acting Chief of Police.

The NOW faction also raised concerns about allegations from justice personnel of unfair treatment or victimization involving decisions by the Chief of Police and questioned how employees could be protected while John temporarily carried out Acting SG responsibilities.

The Minister told Parliament that no formal complaints concerning those allegations have been submitted.

She explained that personnel placement and appointment decisions are not made solely by the Chief of Police. Positions are filled through an established process involving a selection committee, which submits its advice to the Chief of Police. According to the Minister, the Chief of Police is not a member of that committee.

The Minister described allegations of unfair treatment and victimization as serious, but cautioned that unverified claims should not be treated as established fact without being addressed through formal complaint procedures.

Justice personnel who believe they have experienced misconduct or unfair treatment can use both internal and external complaint procedures, according to the Ministry. Internally, complaints may be submitted through the Bureau of Internal Affairs, directly to a member of the KPSM management team or to the Chief of Police.

Complaints involving the Chief of Police himself may be filed externally with the National Detectives, Public Prosecutor’s Office or Minister of Justice. A confidential advisor program is also being developed through cooperation within the Board of Police Chiefs of the Kingdom to provide an additional support mechanism for personnel.

The Minister further told Parliament that there are currently no reports or evidence of retaliation against personnel who have submitted complaints.

Lewis also questioned John’s role in security screenings of KPSM personnel conducted by the National Security Service, VDSM. The Minister said the Chief of Police has no mandate concerning VDSM security screenings. Depending on the position, justice personnel are subject either to a VDSM screening or a Certificate of Good Conduct accompanied by a background check.

VDSM conducts its screenings independently under its own legal authority, with the Chief of Police informed only of the outcome and required to act accordingly.

If an employee does not receive a positive security screening, that person must be reassigned to another position within KPSM or the Ministry of Justice that does not require VDSM clearance. The Minister said the authority to make such an appointment rests solely with the Minister of Justice.

The Minister’s response leaves little indication that she intends to reconsider the temporary Acting SG arrangement or subject it to the independent examination requested by the NOW faction, maintaining that the decision was within her authority and that existing parliamentary, administrative and legal accountability mechanisms are sufficient.

‍