214 / 494
213
consider that those payments by the Ministry should displace
the statutory duty to investigate those claims and assess
compensation. There was an obvious and urgent need for
social intervention. This was part of Government’s
responsibility. We determined that there would be no
double compensation.”
8.159.
Mr. Witter said that claims made to OPD were dealt with
“forensically” and complainants were required to provide proof of losses.
“We also took photographs of damage and sought
corroboration of the claims. The methodology we used was
‘replacement cost’. We approached compensation in much
the same way as a judge assessing damages and we arrived
at a figure for each claim.”
8.160.
The Public Defender (Interim) Act, 2000 empowers the Public
Defender to award legal aid in respect of cases establishing, to a probability, an
infringement of any constitutional right of an individual and for which the State
has not provided redress. Mr. Witter said that, although he had such statutory
power, he did not authorise the payment of any monies up to the time when he
demitted office.
PART 3
ADEQUACY OF COMPENSATION
8.161.
The Commission of Enquiry is not a court of law. Having regard to
rules of law which require strict proof of loss and damage, the time constraints
imposed on the Commission and the large number of persons who suffered
property damage and loss, the Commission was not competent to carry out
detailed assessments of the quantum of compensation paid or payable to
persons. Moreover, the overwhelming majority of witnesses testifying about
property damage and loss, were of opinion that money received from the MoLSS
was inadequate.