- 3 -
There is a school of thought which favours legal representation in these hearings; a view to which we do not subscribe. Such proceedings should take the form of a seeking after truth and are not judicial. Once legal representation is introduced there is grave danger that the hearings will develop into a technical battle, demanding a far higher standard of proof and opening the door to unavoidable loopholes, which will in the end render the truth far less likely to emerge.
In passing may we comment that far less time would be spent in these formal hearings if the proceedings were, as a matter of course, recorded on tape rather than in long- hand, which often seems to be the case, and a more accurate and less disputable record would result.
Certain other matters in the disciplinary field seem
to us worthy of comment and indeed have already been discussed with appropriate persons. There appears to be a considerable movement of paper before a punishment can be imposed. For example, following a formal hearing by an Investigating Committee under Regulation 57 of Colonial Regulations as we understand it the papers then have to be referred to the Legal Branch, Civil Service Branch, Head of Department, Public Services Commission (in many cases) and the Civil Service Branch again before going forward to the Governor with recommendations. There may be inescapable reasons for this but it must surely be pro- longing the procedure considerably.
Again with interdiction, it appears to us that interdiction from duty under Regulation 60 of Colonial Regulations only comes at a very late stage of the proceedings. This seems to open the way for an officer who may be suspected on good grounds of criminal mis- conduct to continue to occupy a position of trust and responsibility, and to perhaps further his criminal design or frustrate an investigation into his misconduct, when it would be far safer to remove him temporarily from office. However, this would presumably require either a change of Regulation or a very wide interpretation of Regulation 60(i)(b). Also it appears that once an individual is acquitted of a criminal offence he is usually reinstated to duty forthwith and before the disciplinary issues are determined. There seems to be no requirement in Colonial Regulations that this should be so and a safer general rule would be for interdiction to remain until all issues are finalised.
In connection with the general question of policy concerning the institution of formal disciplinary