Commissioner Navin Beekarry, suspected of having concluded ?suspicious deals? with Iframac for the sale and purchase of his own car, seems to be in a fine mess. The police has thus verified with the acting finance and administration manager of the Independent Commission against Corruption (ICAC), Vijay Nemchand, if proper procedures were followed. This initiative came after the statement given to the police by former ICAC director of investigations, Roshi Badhain, in which he confirms some of Jack Bizlall?s allegations.

The trade unionist asserted that the commissioner benefited from ?a gratification? by Iframac - an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act. In his detailed statement filed with the police, Roshi Bhadain has elaborated on the normal ICAC procedures for the purchase of cars and on Navin Beekarry?s personal car. The former director of investigations declared that, in September 2003, he went into Navin Beekarry?s office. The latter, who was hanging up the phone, told him : ?I have just made a fantastic deal with Iframac.? Navin Beekarry also added that ?he had managed to get a brand new car in exchange for his old one without paying anything to the company?.

Besides, Roshi Bhadain gave important details on the way six new cars were purchased by the ICAC. He explained that there had been no invitations to tender and that even Vijay Nemchand was upset about this matter. After questioning the latter, the investigators may call six other persons named by Roshi Bhadain in his statement. Navin Beekarry might have cause to worry if they all confirm Bhadain?s and Bizlall?s versions.

The Parliamentary committee also has the impression that it has been ?misled? over the question of the car. But this is not the only cause of their discontent with the commissioner. After Jack Bizlall?s allegations, Navin Beekarry issued an official statement on 20 April 2004 on behalf of the commission. The parliamentary committee did not appreciate this press release. They believe that Navin Beekarry should have answered in his own name since the trade unionist?s allegations were aimed at him and not at the institution.

Jack Bizlall accused the ICAC commissioner of having indulged in illegal personal transactions that did not however undermine the commission?s credibility. Yet, Navin Beekarry stated in this communiqué: ?The ICAC deplores the fact that it is the object of campaigns in the media that systematically denigrate the commission and aim at destabilising it. This is a cause for rejoicing among all those involved in corruption.? He even wondered if it was a ?strategy set up to impede ICAC?s mission of fighting fraud and corruption.?

Navin Beekarry is still convinced that he did the right thing since the ICAC was also mentioned. However, he added that he would give explanations on the allegations later since an internal enquiry was on and he was looking for legal advice. The parliamentary committee seems just as impatient as the public and Bizlall to hear his explanations.