The purpose of summonsing witnesses is to enable the Council or its committee to investigate matters of public policy, not private affairs of citizens.
In case doubts still linger on the minds of some members of the public, I would like to assure them that under Clause 13 of the bill, a witness summonsed to give evidence or to produce any paper before the Council may refuse to answer a question or produce any such paper on the ground that it is of a private nature and does not affect the subject of inquiry. The President may them excuse the answering of the question or production of the paper.
Further protection is given under Clause 14 (1) which says that a witness is entitled to the same right and privilege as before a court of Law, which includes non-disclosure of privileged information like that between a witness and his lawyer, and protection against self-incrimination.
My personal
Concern has been raised over the power of the President in deciding whether or not a witness may be excused from answering a question or producing a paper.
It appears view is that someone has to decide on such matters. to be a sensible arrangement for the President to make the decision. The President, who may be elected by Members of the Council in future, will be held accountable to Members for his If exercise of power and should be trusted to act reasonably. he were to act in a wholly unreasonable way or beyond his powers, then the witness may, as I understand the proposed amendment to clause 24, have recourse to the court for redress.
There is a suggestion that some kind of rules
committee similar to the UK Parliamentary Committee on Privilege should be set up to handle any complaints witnesses
Although it is not might wish to lodge after giving evidence.
necessary to write this suggestion into the bill itself, the recommendation merits some consideration in that it would give
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.