Our new constitution: Make haste slowly
Sterling Dwayne Ebanks
The
draft new constitution, slated to come into effect following the
next general election scheduled for November 2004, will introduce
many fundamental and unfamiliar changes: the creation of a Cabinet
Office and Cabinet Secretary, Deputy Governor, Electoral Boundary
Commission, Complaints Commissioner (Ombudsman), Advisory Committee
on the Prerogative of Mercy, the party system with a Chief Minister
and Leader of the Opposition.
The accompanying draft interim Order-in-Council
further exacerbates the situation as it amends the present constitution
before the introduction of the new constitution. This order not
only creates two additional seats, but also establishes a boundaries
commission that has the power to divide the Islands into seventeen
new constituencies.
The stipulation that the next election is to be contested under
new procedures is in itself sufficient for us to examine the proposed
changes to ensure that they are what we want and are in our best
interests. It is proposed that voters at the next election will
choose their MLAs from seventeen single-member constituencies
where each voter will only be allowed to cast one vote; so for
voters in West Bay and George Town, for example, who have been
accustomed to voting for four MLAs will now only be able to vote
for one person and this choice will be determined by the area
in which they live.
Similarly, it is proposed that ExCo will be renamed Cabinet and increased to ten comprising the Governor, Deputy Governor, Attorney General (AG) and seven elected members including a Chief Minister. It is rumoured that there will be a Minister of Finance and Minister of Home Affairs and we query whether they will now replace the Financial Secretary and Chief Secretary, respectively.
There is still some uncertainty as to whether the AG will remain as an ex officio member or become a political appointee. There are some who believe that the AG should be an elected member, some who contend that the post holder should be appointed by the Chief Minister, whilst others who argue that we should maintain the status quo whereby the AG remains a civil servant. There was also some discussion about whether the AG needed to be a qualified lawyer. The resolution of these very contentious issues is absolutely necessary before the Cayman Islands adopt a new constitution.
There are a number of people who suggest that we adopt the new constitution as proposed and make changes as we go along. While there is little argument that our constitution needs updating, the amendments need to be approved by the people. There needs to be more time for our people to educate ourselves on the new constitution, to understand the consequences of the proposed changes and to give further input, if desired. The fact that a country's constitution is the supreme law of the land makes it critical that we get it right, as too many amendments in a short space of time could be perceived as a sign of instability a perception that could take decades to reverse, if at all.
If the pressure to adopt a new constitution
before the next election is from our own politicians who are seeking
greater power, then they must be reminded that they have been
elected to serve, not ordained to dictate. If, however, the urgency
is from the UK government then our politicians must stand united
to ensure that our people's rights are not abused, that the wishes
of Caymanians are not ignored and that the UK does not railroad
the process and impose its wishes against our will. After all,
it is us who will have to live under the new constitution, and
not the UK government.
We need to ensure that the new constitution provides the requisite
framework for transparency and accountability, as there will be
new and increased powers vested in new and expanded positions.
The powers and responsibilities of the Chief Minister, for instance,
need to be balanced to ensure that the hands of the post holder
are not tied, but at the same time, avoiding the possibility of
creating an elected dictator as is often the case in other parts
of the Caribbean. It is important to ensure that our constitution
does not create a situation where a post holder is perceived to
be above the law.
It is crucial for the good governance of the country that we not only do the right things, but do things right. Our new constitution and the draft Bill of Rights will have such an indomitable effect on our way of life that it is important we take sufficient time to get it right. Any grave mistake made in haste could have untold and immeasurable consequences for generations to come.
It is hoped that there are no hidden agendas
behind implementing a new constitution before the next election.
I trust that we will not rush the constitution, as it would be
a grave disservice to our people if the new constitution were
adopted without a proper educational awareness campaign and adequate
understanding of the proposed changes.
The presentation by the UN Ambassador and the recent visit by
the Cayman delegation to the decolonisation summit in Anguilla
highlighted the growing perception that England has been less
than forthcoming with its territories. It would be prudent to
assess whether other options are available to us before forging
ahead with the pre-packaged document sent from the UK.
The constitution should be a major issue in the upcoming election and the successful government would then be given a mandate to implement the new constitution for the following election in 2008. During the ensuing period there would be opportunity for an extensive and informative educational awareness programme. There could also be opportunity for referenda on major issues and our constitution should provide the people with the ability to initiate a referendum. Our constitution should be a document that empowers, and it should equip our politicians to be better leaders and managers. Our constitution will give more power, and it should provide more accountability.
The UK has said that there is no fixed timeline
to complete the constitutional review process and has only suggested
that the new constitution take effect before the next election.
In fact, Baroness Amos in her letter to the Governor dated February
5, 2003 noted that at the constitutional talks in London in December
2002 it was proposed to delay the adoption of the human rights
chapter of the proposed new constitution until 1 January 2006
"to allow time for the necessary legislative and administrative
preparations to be completed in the Cayman Islands beforehand".
In addition, Section 71 (1)(a) of the proposed new constitution
notes that the first Electoral Boundary Commission shall be appointed
within eight years of the date of commencement of the new constitution.
Therefore, there is no rush to appoint the boundary commission
or establish the seventeen new constituencies before the next
election
If time can be allowed to prepare for the human rights chapter,
then Caymanians should be given the same respect and afforded
the time to educate ourselves on the new constitution, to understand
the consequences of the proposed changes and to give further input,
especially if there is no real urgency to implement the new constitution
before the next general election. This document is only a draft
and not the final version. It is what England has proposed our
new constitution should look like; it is a mere suggestion and
not carved in stone.
Perhaps, in the long term the greater good may be better served if the next general election were contested under the present constitution. Will our politicians place the people's interest first? Can we set aside personal animosities and work together for the good of our country?
At the end of the day it should be the wishes of the people that prevail, not the whims of the politician, and we should never forget that to whom much is given, much is required.