THE GOVERNMENT'S chief legal adviser has suggested that Parliament's Public Accounts Committee (PAC) await the outcome of a civil case involving Dr Omer Thomas and the Bureau of Standards Jamaica (BSJ), before deliberating on controversial payments made to him.

Payments in the sum of more than $8 million to the bureau's former CEO was highlighted in the auditor general's report as a breach of government guidelines.

Thomas had reportedly received the package as ex-gratia payment at the end of his tenure at the standards agency.

Last year, the PAC sought advice from Solicitor General Douglas Leys as to whether a hearing of the matter would be appropriate at this time, in light of the civil action.

The unresolved matter was highlighted at Tuesday's meeting of Parliament's PAC by Chairman Dr Omar Davies.

Thomas told The Gleaner last year that he was suing the bureau for sums owed to him.

In a letter to the PAC, Leys said his research found that there were no provisions that would prohibit the parliamentary committee from conducting its investigations.

However, Leys expressed the view that it would be more appropriate for the PAC to await the decision of the Supreme Court before proceeding.

"In determining whether Dr Thomas is entitled to the sums being claimed, the court shall be required to determine Dr Thomas' entitlement to certain pay increases and the legal effect, if any, of certain supplemental agreements allegedly made between him and the board of the bureau," Leys outlined in his letter.

He stressed that any hearing from the PAC on the issue at this time would be premature.

Determination

Leys argued that, if the PAC were to arrive at a decision adverse to Dr Thomas, "it is my opinion that a court would not uphold any attempts by the Government to recover while a determination on this substantive issue is pending."

In 2006, then permanent secretary in the Ministry of Commerce, Science and Technology, Dr Jean Dixon, had written to the Attorney General's Department for advice on the controversial payment to Thomas.

A.J. Nicholson, who was the attorney general at the time, responded to Dixon's query in a letter dated June 1, 2006, responded to Dixon's query. He said there was no suggestion that Thomas had any contractual entitlement to ex-gratia honorarium amounting to $6.5 million and office equipment valued at more than $300,000.

edmond.campbell@gleanerjm.com