A growing political controversy over a top Bahamian public official’s visible partisan activity has put the country’s public service neutrality rules under the spotlight, with top cabinet officials passing responsibility for addressing the situation between government departments.
Bahamas Foreign Affairs Minister Fred Mitchell said Tuesday he would not offer any public comment on the controversy surrounding Melvin Seymour, his ministry’s Permanent Secretary, who was photographed wearing branded gear of the ruling Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) during Nomination Day at a political rally on Cat Island, an event attended by Prime Minister Philip Davis.
The incident drew sharp criticism last week from Brensil Rolle, the country’s former Public Service Minister. Rolle argued that Seymour’s public display of partisan affiliation directly violates the government’s General Orders, which mandate political neutrality for civil servants. He warned that failure to take disciplinary action would erode public trust in the independence and integrity of the public service, ultimately rendering the regulations governing public officials’ political activity unenforceable.
Mitchell pushed back against repeated requests for comment during a press briefing, insisting that personal conduct falls to the individual and internal personnel matters should remain confidential. “I really don’t have any comment to make on any of that, except to say that one’s personal conduct is one’s personal conduct,” Mitchell said. “There are people who are responsible for the matters which you’ve raised, but that’s as far as I can go at this point.”
When asked whether public servants across the country are treated equally regardless of their political alignment, Mitchell declined to answer, noting that it would be inappropriate for him to address the question. He emphasized that privacy should be the default standard for handling internal personnel issues, pushing back against growing demands for public transparency around the case.
“I understand in this dispensation that privacy means nothing to anyone anymore, but my view is privacy is an important issue, and personnel matters are private and personal, unless that person wants to disclose what those issues are,” Mitchell said. He added that under his leadership of the Foreign Ministry, no public servant affiliated with the opposition Free National Movement (FNM) has faced dismissal or professional retaliation for their political membership.
Mitchell repeatedly rejected further calls for public comment, reaffirming that internal personnel matters should not be debated in public and that the issue falls under the purview of other government bodies. “Again, I said personnel matters are private. I have no wish to delve into someone’s personal personnel issues in public, and I don’t think it’s appropriate to do so. I think that’s a question which ought to be left to others,” he said.
Labour and Public Service Minister Pia Glover-Rolle clarified Sunday that the Seymour case falls under the jurisdiction of the Office of the Prime Minister. “The Office of the Prime Minister will, in that regard, handle any communications regarding that matter,” she said, adding that her department has already issued clear, repeated guidance on the General Orders that restrict public servants’ partisan political engagement.
Latrae Rahming, communications director for the Prime Minister’s Office, confirmed Tuesday that Prime Minister Davis will address questions about Seymour directly to the press, though he could not provide a specific timeline for the briefing.
At its core, the controversy hinges on whether Seymour’s public partisan display violated the General Orders that require all civil servants to remain politically neutral. Seymour, a retired public servant who was rehired into his current role, earns a total annual compensation package of $221,316, combining his salary, existing pension, and job-related allowances.