GOVERNMENT'S third attempt at the Whistleblower Protection Bill continues on its way to proclamation after it was passed in the Senate on July 3.
The bill was passed with 23 votes in favour and six opposition senators voting against it.
While the independent senators threw support behind the bill, it was not without raising some concerns.
Continuing her contribution from July 2's sitting, Dr Maria Dillon-Remy took issue with sections 13 to 16 of the bill which proposes that a reporting unit being set up to receive external whistleblower reports. Particularly, she took issue with the whistleblowing officers and questioned the method used to be appointed.
"We know that you can have a law and you put people in positions, but if the people are not the right people, you're not going to get the right outcomes. So how confidential are the people in the unit who are designated whistleblowing officers? It's a concern for me.
"How do we make sure, as we put this in place, and I'm not saying by any means that we should not, but making sure that the people that are chosen in these different departments or in different ministries etcetera are the right people. And also, making sure that having made the disclosure that things don't disappear. As we know, files disappear etcetera."
Independent Senator Deoroop Teemal said he believed the bill should have been subject to a joint select committee (JSC) for "rigorous review." Had this been done, he said, there could have been expert input into the legislation.
Opposition senator Jayanti Lutchmedial-Ramdial agreed with Teemal's view.
"It's not just about how functional the legislation can be you know, it's about at which different junctures the operation and implementation of this legislation the law can be challenged or it could lead to unintended consequences. Those are the things that you flesh out in a JSC. Again, a government that wants to and is committed to passing good law would take the time to listen and do that."
She called on the Government to withdraw the bill and send it to a JSC for scrutiny before bringing it back to Parliament.
"That's why people think there is a nefarious sort of aim on the part of Government when they come here to shove through this legislation without giving the time and due consideration it requires. It is a serious piece of law. It is a piece of law that everyone acknowledges from 2016 come forward interferes with individual rights."
She argued that protections offered to whistleblowers will lead to an imbalance of rights. She gave the example that someone could make an untrue claim but, because of their identity and disclosure being protected, a person's ability to defend themselves could be compromised.
Temporary opposition senator Karunaa Bisramsingh shared a similar sentiment. However, among the issues raised was what she described as the inherent risk of a whistleblower's identity being revealed through the course of investigation or prosecution.
"For example, if the details of the report are specific to a particu
