Every controversy in Antigua and Barbuda, it seems, must first pass through a political sieve. Scandal is rarely examined for what it reveals about systemic weakness; instead, it is mined for its usefulness to whichever side can weaponise.

Over time, this reflex has hardened into the dominant language of our national life. A zero-sum theater where accountability isn’t sought for correction but for conquest. Truth becomes partisan territory. The question is no longer what happened, but who benefits from the story’s telling.

The recent episode is just the latest example. Before the facts could be settled, the narratives had already formed: one side defending its minister, the other demanding her resignation, and the public square caught between supporting the defense, outrage, cynicism, and exhaustion. Hidden in the noise is the deeper issue: the failure of the systems that should have prevented such controversies from happening in the first place.

This is the most damaging effect of entrenched partisanship: once every issue becomes a proxy battle for political legitimacy, the national interest is crowded out. Institutions lose authority. Facts lose stability. Governance is negatively impacted. Even the call for transparency becomes an act of political positioning rather than a pursuit of truth.

Who, in our current system, stands between the accusation and the adjudication? Who filters rhetoric from fact? Who carries the authority of impartial truth?

Who Decides What Is True?

When both the ruling party and the opposition are deeply partisan in their framing, when “sources close to or inside the party” become the default standard of verification, Antigua and Barbuda exposes a dangerous vacuum in its governance architecture.

There is no reliably empowered intermediary institution capable of evaluating allegations, conducting objective reviews, issuing findings, and commanding trust across political lines.

The Office of the Director of Audit, the Integrity Commission, and the Information Commissioner all exist on paper, and all should function as neutral arbiters. Yet they remain chronically under-resourced, politically constrained, and operationally muted. Reports arrive years late, if at all, in some instances. Findings are selectively amplified or quietly shelved.

Without trusted institutional filters, politics becomes the sole interpreter of events, and therefore the sole producer of “truth.” Every controversy becomes a storyline; every inquiry a tactic; every allegation a weapon.

The Price of Accountability: Inquiry, Restitution, or Reform?

Calls for commissions of inquiry and legal restitution are now predictable. But accountability has a price. The IHI matter showed how individuals spent large sums defending themselves while the Government spent millions in legal battles, all in the name of justice, resulting in exhaustion.

In small states, indefinite legal warfare becomes both a financial and institutional burden.

Thus, enter negotiated restitution: settlements, repayments, Cabinet-led reviews. Pragmatic, yes! But does negotiation without full disclosure deliver justice or convenience? If restitution is to be a credible model, it must lead to stronger procurement rules, tighter auditing, enforceable reporting, and transparency.

Maslow’s Pathway to a Functional Public Service
Before turning to solutions, my curious mind framed our national challenges within Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs framework. It provided a valuable lens for understanding why our governance struggles persist: A nation’s potential is restricted; in Maslow’s theory, self-actualisation is stunted when the foundation remains unstable.

Before Antigua & Barbuda can self-actualise, it must pursue three constructs espoused by Maslow. Firstly, stability – rules respected, not bent. Second, esteem – a civil service valued for competence, not compliance. And third, actualisation – innovation driven by institutions, not personalities.

Ironically, Antigua and Barbuda has invested heavily in the top of Maslow’s pyramid, tertiary education and training programmes, while the lower tiers remain fragile. We produce highly qualified graduates only to place them in structures that value proximity over professionalism.

A significant challenge for fulfillment is how we process. Major reform originates from the Cabinet, with little consultation and an active implementation plan from the administrative machinery. Reform becomes directive, often with grudging, forced support from the public service that had to absorb the public’s scorn for the breakdowns that led to the controversy.  

This is our paradox: aiming for the top of the pyramid while eroding the base, thus undermining the pathway to an efficient and transparent system, with functional checks and balances.

The Gendered Dimension

Political scrutiny is gendered. Males and Females are judged through different lenses. The public discourse on Minister Maria Bird-Browne’s involvement in the current saga continues the misogyny of women in the political arena: women must justify their presence even before defending decisions. This gendered pressure mirrors our weakened institutions: when systems fail, scrutiny becomes personal rather than structural.

A Call for National Self-Actualisation

Good intentions cannot rescue a broken system. At a minimum, reform requires redefined accountability across the governance chain, empowered civil servants, independent oversight, digital transparency, and rebuilding trust through consistent behaviour.

A nation cannot evolve if each scandal ends with blame but no correction.

Self-actualisation requires functioning systems and empowered institutions. Antigua & Barbuda stands at a crossroads: continue filtering governance through partisan lenses or prioritise institutional maturity.

We must urgently strengthen our institutions, with particular attention to those responsible for conducting audits and integrity checks.  We must encourage professional respect and move our national dialogue to the point where partisan choices do not outweigh a national consensus for strong and effective, continuous corporate governance, regardless of the political administration.

Only then will the nation move beyond partisan reflexes and into true development and empowerment.