Letters Addressed to H.E. the Governor from 'People For The Referendum'
Re: PreviousCorrespondence
Dear Sir
Re: People For Referendum Petition.
We refer to our previous correspondenceon the above subject and the Referendum Petition (Petition) submittedon Tuesday, June 18, 2002 to the Hon. W. McKeeva Bush, OBE, JP,Leader of Government Business.
A Private Member's motion was submittedto the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly (Speaker) requestingthe Government to bring a Bill to the Legislative Assembly fora Referendum Law on Constitutional Modernisation issues. The Speakersubsequently refused to accept the Motion.
At a meeting of the Legislative Assemblyon June 5, 2002 the Speaker ejected the "Strangers"from the Legislative Assembly.
Some of those "Strangers" ejectedby the Speaker from the Legislative Assembly, walked to the GovernmentAdministration Building to request an audience with you sir.
The group was advised that you would onlymeet with three persons, for which we are grateful. The groupappointed three persons to represent them, they were:
Mr. Al Ebanks
Ms. Lucille Seymour
Mr. William Adam
At that meeting some of the subjects discussedwere:
The representatives' expressed to you thata significant segment of the population believed the ConstitutionalCommissioners Report (Report) and their Draft Constitution wasbeing rushed to the Legislative Assembly for debate. Most peoplehave only just recently grasped the seriousness of the proposedConstitutional amendments; the importance of their participationin the Constitutional review process, and what affect it wouldhave on their daily lives.
We understand Government's position to be,that the people have had their opportunity for input. However,since the people have come to realize the need to participate,however late, we feel it would be wrong to prevent them at thisstage from having input before anything is forwarded to the Foreignand Commonwealth Office (FCO). How can the Government possiblysay what influence the people's input would now have on the outcomeof this review, and more importantly, and the future of the CaymanIslands.
The representatives' advised you that thepopulation were widely divided over some Constitutional amendmentsproposed in the Report, and that many in the population were ofthe opinion that the well proven democratic process of referendumwas the only way to determine the exact wishes of the electorate.
The Hon. W. McKeeva Bush, OBE, Jp., Leaderof Government business also concisely stated this opinion on October1, 1999 in the Legislative Assembly Debate on Private Member'sMotion 11/99, A Referendum Law when he said "as I said, thepeople are asking to have more say in the affairs of the country.They want to be able to say, yes or no, on certain issues andwe want to give them that authority, through a referendum."
We see eye to eye with Mr. Bush in this statement.
The Hon. Julianna O'Connor-Connolly, Speakerof the Legislative Assembly, also concisely stated this opinionon September 9, 1999 in the Legislative Assembly Debate on PrivateMember's Motion 11/99, A Referendum Law when she said "Itis also a common view, Mr. Speaker, that a referendum is the onlyway in which the Parliament can find out for sure exactly whatthe people want and be really specific in so doing".
We fully agree with Ms. O'Connor-Connollyin this statement.
The representatives sought your guidanceon the options open to those members of the population who hadconcerns with the direction that the Constitutional Review Processhas taken.
You outlined to the representatives twooptions:
Option 1: The members of the group couldwrite a letter to you outlining the group's concerns for forwardingto Executive Council.
Option 2: A petition could be circulatedamongst the population stating the items of Constitutional concernsfor the holding of a referendum.
Following the meeting with you the aboveinformation was communicated to the group. The decision was madeto adopt the option for a Constitutional Referendum Petition.
Subsequently the Steering Committee forPeople For Referendum was established which includes some of therepresentatives.
Last week representatives from the Peoplefor Referendum presented the Government with petitions signedby more than 7,000 of the population. The petition called forGovernment to delay debate on the Constitution and bring a Billfor a Law to hold a Referendum so that voters can clearly statetheir views on proposed changes to the Constitution.
After being presented with the signed petitions,the Government stated that it was their intention to forward thepetitions to the FCO.
Government's intention to send the ReferendumPetition to the FCO for their guidance is NOT what People ForReferendum asked for in its petition. The petition asked Governmentto exercise their current Constitutional authority to pass a ReferendumBill as outlined in the petition.
Why refer a matter to the United KingdomGovernment (UK) when the Constitution given to the Cayman Islandsby an Order In Council from 1992, gave the Cayman Islands Governmentthe authority and responsibility to introduce at any time a ReferendumBill to enact a Referendum Law on any issue which the LegislativeAssembly deemed sufficiently important?
In effect the UK said over 10 years agoto the Cayman Islands Government, you have our permission to passa Referendum Law on any issue the majority of the Members of theLegislative Assembly deem of sufficient national importance.
If the major proposed amendments to ourConstitution are not reason enough for Government to pass a ConstitutionReferendum Bill, then on what more important an issue, can wehave a referendum?
Is the Government actually listening tothe people? We think not.
We are asking you Sir, to explain to thepopulation why the Constitution Petition is being sent to theUK Government?
For the purposes of good communication,we also request a copy of the exchange of correspondence betweenthe Cayman Islands and the UK Government on this subject. If thestated intentions of Government are not altered, then we do intendto make our own representations to the UK Government; we willof course keep you fully informed of our correspondence.
The UK sent a Constitutional ModernizationChecklist to all Overseas Territories (OT) to follow in theirconstitutional review process.
· In the Cayman Islands responseto the UK we are required to answer the following questions onthe checklist:
· "Do the changes suggested by the OT (Cayman Islands)government have the support of the majority of thepopulation?" (Checklist item 18)
· "What is the evidence for such support?" (Checklistitem 18)
· "Has there been extensive local consultationfollowedby a debate in the legislature in which the suggested changeshave been approved by motion..."? (Checklist item 18)
· Dothe suggestions made by all MLAs "promote more open, transparentand accountable Government"? (Checklist item.2)
The UK's Checklist, as distributed by GovernmentInformation Services, makes it clear that the UK wants the CaymanIslands population to have a fair chance of understanding theConstitutional issues and that their wishes are included in whatis forwarded to the UK, before the UK returns the draft Constitutionto us.
Executive Council by stating their intentto forward the Petition to the FCO has demonstrated its unwillingnessto listen to the people, and the People will not be ignored!
Your Excellency, the ultimate responsibilityof good governance is yours Sir.
We hereby request that you exercise theinfluence and power of your office as Governor of the Cayman Islands,to require the Government to fulfil their Constitutional obligationto make a decision on the People For Referendum's Petition, beforeany submissions are made to the FCO. In our opinion, Governmentsintention to forward the Petition to the UK is an attempt to escapetheir Constitutional responsibilities.
The People for Referendum and more than7,000 of the population call on Your Excellency the Governor tointervene on our behalf.
We await your response.
Yours truly,
Dennie Warren Jr,Chairman
William H. Adam, Committee Member
| Re: Elections Office Analysis of Petition Signatures Your Excellency, Re: People For Referendum Petition We understand, subject to your correction, that the Elections Office was instructed by your authority to analyse the count of signatures on the Referendum Petition Forms (Petition). We have been following the analysis of the over 7,000 signatures and we are aware that this process is now complete. The Elections Office made copies of the original petition forms as working copies and marked each signature on the petition form in one of three categories: We understand that the Elections Office has now completed the count and writing of the report and forwarded the results to your office along with the original copies of the petitions. The working copies of the petition form are still retained by the Elections Office awaiting the instructions from Government as to their disposition. We are hereby requesting that you provide us with: It is our intention to examine each of the petition forms with unreadable signatures/names with the assistance of our Sign Up Station Volunteers for the purpose of determining if we can identify any of the signatures/names. Thanking you in advance for your prompt response. Yours faithfully, Dennie Warren Jr, Chairman |