Why Bunting is defiant despite gun permit backlash

Opposition Spokesman on National Security Peter Bunting has sought to poke holes in the Integrity Commission’s special report linking him to the evolving scandal at the Firearm Licensing Authority (FLA).

In a brief statement to the media on Monday, Bunting said key elements of his responses were omitted in the published report into allegations of impropriety, irregularity and corruption in the issuance of firearm permits to persons of questionable character.

The commission’s report cited Bunting, who was national security minister between 2012 and 2016, for granting a licence to a man whose United States (US) records for drug trafficking were expunged. The other concerned another man who was never charged for that matter. An assault case against him was dismissed, and the judge made no orders in another.

But Bunting said the commission, in its final report, left out “important” parts of his submission relating to the role of the firearm review board which would “assist the public in distilling the facts of the cases”.

In one instance, the report said Bunting approved an applicant who was arrested and charged in the US for the offences of trafficking cocaine, four counts of larceny, and grand theft in the third degree.

The applicant’s firearm user’s licence was revoked in September 2012 on the basis that he misrepresented himself to the FLA and was no longer considered fit and proper to be issued with a firearm.

The applicant’s criminal record was expunged two years later in October 2014 and, by way of a letter, “it was indicated that Mr Peter Bunting, then minister of national security, granted the issuance of a firearm user licence”.

The FLA board also subsequently withdrew the 2012 revocation because the basis on which the permit was annulled had become void.

In the second instance, Bunting approved an applicant who was arrested and charged for the offence of indecent assault.

The report said it was further revealed that the applicant molested a little girl who was related to his wife. However, the matter was not reported to the police, resulting in no action taken against the applicant.

His application was denied in January 2012 on the basis that he was interviewed and found unfit to be armed.

It was subsequently approved on appeal in April 2014.

Bunting, in his submission, said the review board on which he relied comprised a retired judge of the Supreme Court, a retired judge of the Court of Appeal, and a leading Queen’s Counsel.

He said in its findings and recommendations for the first case, the board disagreed with the FLA’s decision because the file had no evidence of the nature of the misrepresentation “allegedly perpetrated” by the appellant and equally that the file disclosed no result of the criminal charges “allegedly preferred” against him in the US.

In the second case, Bunting said the review board, comprising the aforementioned group, “rejected the decision of the FLA” in respect of the application.

However, he said that the director of the protective security division recommended that the application for a personal licence should not be granted because he did not show a need to have a personal firearm.

“I accepted this recommendation and allowed his appeal in respect of the employee’s firearm user permits only,” said Bunting.

He said the reports submitted by the official investigator indicated that the appellant was of good character and appropriate temperament, which supported his appeal.