EDITORIAL

Constitutional imprudence

Friday,  October 7, 2005

According to a recent statement by the Chief Minister of the Turks & Caicos Islands, a sister British Dependent Territory in the region, talks with the United Kingdom Government on constitutional reform have been successfully concluded with an agreement for an advanced constitution for the territory.

In other words, the Turks & Caicos have managed to achieve what the Cayman Islands have been bickering over for several years. Granted, the Turks & Caicos Islands have not been immune to differences of opinion within the political establishment because, at the last minute, the opposition reportedly decided not to attend the final talks in London and therefore effectively abandoned their participation in the quest for constitutional advancement.

Sounds familiar? It should. Constitutional advancement for this country was an area where change was resisted particularly during the past four years, and many more before that since 1991 with political expediency apparently overriding the progress of democracy in the Cayman Islands.

During this time, the situation degenerated from the sublime to the ridiculous, with the previous administration, the United Democratic Party adopting four different positions on the issue within the space of eighteen months, culminating in their announcement that they were in favour of single-member constituencies in George Town, but not in the rest of the country. One might add that they were indeed right to be concerned about their electoral prospects in the capital.

Part and parcel of constitutional advancement is the adoption of an enforceable Bill of Rights. Those in power prior to the last election perpetuated the approach of previous governments in resisting change in this respect. As Cayman Net News revealed last year, the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office finally admitted that it has been the Cayman Islands government all along that has prevented Cayman residents from complaining about abuses of human rights.

Granted, we saw the usual government reaction – the establishment of an ineffectual committee to pay lip service to the issue without the real changes that are urgently needed being made. Of course, the Turks & Caicos do not have so much to be concerned about in the area of human rights because, strangely, the British Government has extended the right of individual petition to the territory.

A subsequent press release from the Turks & Caicos government, later withdrawn, may provide some indication of the changes to be expected in their new constitution – changes that could be instructive for us in the Cayman Islands.

The post of Chief Minister will be renamed Premier, who will be head of Government.

There will be a reduction of the Governor’s reserved powers and the curtailment of his ability to enact legislation unilaterally or to act without or contrary to the advice of the Cabinet unless instructed otherwise by a Secretary of State.

A new post of Deputy Governor, who will be a Belonger, will be created to assist the Governor in his executive capacity.

The post of Chief Secretary will be abolished. There will be an enlarged and strengthened Public Service Commission, on whose recommendations the Governor will be bound to act unless instructed otherwise by a Secretary of State.

A Judicial Services Commission will be created, which will make recommendations to the Governor on all judicial appointments. The Governor will be bound to accept these recommendations unless instructed otherwise by a Secretary of State.

Perhaps the example of the Turks & Caicos will provide a lead for our own Government and Opposition in pursuing constitutional advancement instead of the imprudence shown in recent years.  

    Back...