The panel probing the Home Affairs Minister's alleged involvement in organised killings says he will not be privy to witness' statements that implicate him.

On Sunday, the commission which is now inviting statements relevant to its mandate published a clarification about its procedures after queries from members of the public.

The notice says that the commission never intended to provide the minister with every witness' statement. This had been one of the fears of some potential witnesses who were afraid of having their identities exposed.

But the commission says statements that implicate him will not be given to him, rather, only the evidence that exculpates him.

A copy of a witness' statement will be furnished to the minister solely on the basis of necessity in the interest of fairness where that statement is favourable to the minister in that it tends to exculpate him or free him of from wrongdoing, the notice said.

It added that the members of the commission will use their own judgment to determine if the issue of fairness has arisen, which would make it necessary to provide the minister with a statement.

The deadline for the submission of statements to the commission is the end of this month. The commission is then expected to hold public hearings based on the evidence it receives.

But so far the response has not been what was hoped for, according to Secretary to the Commission, Gino Persaud.

While denying the minister the privilege of seeing the implicating statements prior to the hearings may seem unfair from a layman's perspective, it is perfectly lawful according to a former attorney general.

Senior Counsel Bernard De Santos points out that the commission does have the power to determine its own procedures which he says will take into account certain guidelines that are expected to be the norm.

And he says there is no requirement that the minister be given the statements that implicate him.

Indeed, the commissioners can make rules for their own guidance and the conduct and management of the procedures, according to the Commissions of Inquiry Act Chapter 19:03.

De Santos believes the commission has most likely decided that the minister would confront his accusers at the hearings; an approach that he says is no different from the one used in murder cases.

He explained that accused persons, in such cases, only hear the evidence against them at the preliminary inquiry stage and if a trial is ordered the depositions of the witnesses are presented to the defence.

He considered allowing the minister the statements that might exculpate him in keeping with rules of disclosure that obtain in normal criminal proceedings.

He said the purpose of disclosure is to reveal material that might be favourable to the accused person, in this context, the minister.