Attorney General (AG) Allyson Maynard-Gibson on Monday noted that, beginning today (Tuesday) The Bahamas will undergo a thorough and rigorous peer review of its anti-corruption regime by an arm of the Organization of American States (OAS).
The AG mentioned the Mechanism for Follow-Up on the Implementation of the Inter-American Convention against Corruption (MESICIC) review in the Senate, during her contribution to debate on the new Gaming Bill 2014 and the attendant regulations - a raft of legislation she said was necessary in order to protect the jurisdiction.
Among the different ways the January 2014 referendum has been characterized, Maynard-Gibson referred to it as a "consultative referendum". Since the "consultative referendum", she said, the government has received notice of evaluations by the World Bank, the Organization of American States (OAS) and the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force (CFATF).
MESICIC is an OAS body designed to promote the implementation of the convention and contribute to the achievement of its purposes. It supports the states parties (OAS member states), such as The Bahamas, in the implementation of the provisions of the convention through a process of reciprocal evaluation.
The results of the review are recommendations with respect to those areas in which there are legal gaps or in which further progress is necessary.
Through MESICIC, a states party can also follow-up on the commitments assumed by the states parties, analyze the manner in which they are being implemented and facilitate technical cooperation activities; the exchange of information, experiences and best practices, and the harmonization of the legislation of the states parties.
The process of reciprocal evaluation takes the form of successive "rounds" which review how the states parties are implementing the provisions of the convention selected for each round. For these purposes, country reports are adopted which formulate concrete recommendations to each states party in order to close the legal gaps that have been detected; correct the inadequacies that have been found, and have indicators in place which allow an objective determination of the results that have been achieved in relation to the implementation of those provisions.
Civil society organizations participate in this process, by submitting information alongside the information submitted by the respective states party. At the conclusion of a round, the committee adopts a hemispheric report.
The current round - the fourth - is a comprehensive review of oversight bodies, with a view to "implementing modern mechanisms for preventing, detecting, punishing and eradicating corrupt acts".
In The Bahamas' response to the fourth round of peer review related to the MESICIC process, it listed a number of such "oversight bodies". Those agencies include the Attorney General's Office, the Public Disclosure Commission, Auditor General, Compliance Commission, the Financial Intelligence Unit, Bahamas Institute of Chartered Accounts (BICA) and others.
Of this list, The Bahamas chose to highlight the AG's Office, the Public Disclosure Commission, the Auditor General Department, the Compliance Commission, the FIU and BICA. The review will examine the results obtained by these agencies in the performance of their duties. The reviewers will also examine - in the case of those of these bodies tasked with the prevention of corrupt acts - the actions taken in the past five years to prevent those acts.
In the cases of those agencies tasked with detecting corrupt acts, The Bahamas will indicate, as appropriate, the total number of investigations begun in each of the past five years and indicate how many remain ongoing,
how many have been suspended for whatever reason, how many have been shelved due to statute of limitations and how many have been shelved without a decision being reached on the merits.
For those oversight bodies tasked with punishing corrupt acts, the indication will be the total number of cases investigated that were ready for a decision to be adopted in each of the past five years, the number of decisions adopted in connection with them, the number of those decisions in which responsibilities were established or penalties were imposed, the number of those decisions in which no responsibilities were found or acquittals were given and the number of those decisions involving the extinction of the punishment or responsibility because of the triggering of the statute of limitations.
And if the oversight body in question is tasked with punishing corrupt acts that trigger civil or financial responsibility for persons involved therein, indicate the monetary sanctions imposed, or of the amounts ordered paid to the state, that have entered the Public Treasury in each of the past five years.

Click here to read more at The Nassau Guardian