Up Front
It was a closely guardedsecret in the Cayman Islands for the past 13, years, but now detailshave emerged about ...
The Coup That Never Was
Last year's sudden change in leadershipin the Cayman Islands may be defined in very casual terms as a"coup" of sorts. But although some people were upsetand perhaps even shocked by the political upheaval following theHon. McKeeva Bush's sudden elevation to power as new leader ofgovernment, the chain of events which allowed for this unforeseenre-election in the Executive Council occurred within the frameworkof the country's constitutional laws.
Hon. LinfordPierson, Mr. Ezzard Miller, Mr. Benson Ebanks, Mr. Norman Bodden
In more common parlance the term "coup"is sometimes used to describe an unexpected change in governmentor transference of power to a different political leader.
Such change in leadership took place withoutapparently compromising the fundamental system that upholds thiscountry's laws of government.
What may come as a surprise to some is thatthese rules were put to the test some 13 years ago when sevenout of eight Backbenchers in the Legislative Assembly who helda majority in the Finance Committee objected to an Executive Councilmotion. The question that remains is what would have happenedto the four ExCo members had the eighth Backbencher decided tovote alongside his peers? In fact, he went in favour of the governmentmotion of the day.
If the opposition Backbenchers had succeededin defeating this ExCo motion, would they have seized this victoryas an opportunity to overthrow the existing government? Was thisthe breeding ground for the coup that never was?
It has been suggested by some that thisscenario could have happened.
The motion that was put forward by ExCoon March 1, 1990 was a request to borrow funds for improving theGeorge Town Hospital. The sum involved was in excess of $1.5 millionwhich it was suggested would pay for the construction of sevennew health care projects.
The objection by the majority of Backbenchersarose because the government's motion meant that the Finance Committeecould be "circumvented" and the House's usual formatof Standing Orders could be put aside. The issue was not so mucha question of disagreement over expanding the health care system in fact there was MLA support for the general idea of tryingto make improvements but it was to do with the government'smove to evade the Finance Committee.
The 1989 Legislative Assembly consistedof 15 members: sitting on the Executive Council were Mr. BensonEbanks, Mr. Norman Bodden, Mr. Linford Pierson and Mr. EzzardMiller as well as the Governor of that era, Mr. Allen J. Scottand the three official members Attorney General, Mr. Richard W.Ground; Chief Secretary, Mr. Lemuel Hurlston and Financial SecretaryMr. Thomas C. Jefferson. The other eight members of the Housewere Mr. McKeeva Bush, Captain Mabry Kirkconnell, Mr. Roy Bodden,Mr. Franklin Smith, Mr. Truman Bodden, Mr. John McLean, Mr. GilbertMcLean and Mr. John Jefferson Jr.
The Finance Committee was controlled byBackbenchers, these being the Chairman (Financial Secretary) andall elected members of the House. The three official members ofthe Legislative Assembly enabled ExCo to have a minimum of sevenvotes and so with Captain Mabry Kirkconnell's vote of confidencethey were able to defeat the remaining seven Backbenchers.
This meant that the full House actuallysuspended the Standing Orders which required the matter to bereferred to the Finance Committee and thus approval for ExCo toborrow the money for George Town Hospital was, in principal, given.
One of the immediate consequences of theseactions was the resignation of Mr. Franklin Smith, the MLA electedin November 1988. He spoke for several others when he expressedthe sentiment that ExCo's handling of the Finance Committee wasperhaps challenging the constitutional rules regarding StandingOrders. The concern was that this move by ExCo would set a precedentand enable the government to acquire funds for future projectsin much the same way.
In a March 1990 interview, he stated that"Executive Council's attempt to "circumvent" FinanceCommittee and secure funds for hospital improvements was "thelast straw". In that same discussion he suggested that theGovernor should have intervened and that such political instabilitymight well signify the need for elections.
The controversial government motion hadwider implications. By avoiding the Finance Committee, the responsibilityof accounting for funds to the public by the twelve elected LAmembers might not be carried out. Indeed, Standing Order 67 (1)(a) requires that any member of Government who puts forward afinancial plan for a proposal which will incur expenditure wherethe Budget has no stipulation for this paper then the matter shouldgo to the Finance Committee.
Backbenchers opposed to this action wereparticularly concerned with the fact that here was a motion beingput forward by a minority in government which begs the questionabout doing what is right for the citizens of a nation.
This constitutional instability did notcome about overnight. The year 1989 had seen moments of tensionbetween ExCo members and Backbenchers, probably one of the morecontroversial ones being the disagreements regarding ExCo's handlingof Cayman Airways aircraft.
The airline sold two of its Boeing 727sto Alaska Airlines and also negotiated a leasing deal with GPAof Ireland to operate to new Boeing 737-400 aircraft.
Yet again, seven out of the eight Backbenchersopposed the leasing plan but were outvoted by ExCo because ofCaptain Mabry Kirkconnell's decision to say "yes" tothe project.
Those against the leasing agreement werevery concerned about the cost implications and potential debt.In fact on 17 July 1989 the seven Backbench MLAs (Mr. Roy Bodden,Mr. Franklin Smith, Mr. McKeeva Bush, Mr. John Jefferson Jr.,Mr. Gilbert McLean, Mr. John McLean and Mr. Truman Bodden) senta letter to the then Acting Governor Thomas Jefferson "requestingthat further negotiations in all the CAL lease deals be put onhold until a full meeting of the Finance Committee is called",according to local press reports.
However the aircraft deal went through causinga serious deterioration in relations between the seven backbenchersand ExCo Members of the Legislative Assembly.
This situation reached crisis point in earlyAugust 1989 when the group of disgruntled Legislative Assemblymembers demanded that the four MLAs , Mr. Norman Bodden, Mr. BensonEbanks, Mr. Ezzard Miller and Mr. Linford Pierson, resign fromtheir positions in the Executive Council.
A statement read by Mr. Truman Bodden tothe local press said that the four ExCo members "do not havethe majority support of the elected Members in the LegislativeAssembly and Finance Committee and accordingly, the best stepis for them to bow out gracefully and allow others who enjoy suchsupport to govern the country. This is the custom in parliamentarydemocracy".
However, the four MLAs did not step downbecause Captain Mabry Kirkconnell refused to support his fellowBackbenchers. Interestingly, on 9 August 1989 eight of the twelveelected Legislative Assembly representatives signed a joint statement"pledging to work together for the good of the country".Among this group were the four ExCo members as well as Messrs.McKeeva Bush, Roy Bodden, Franklin Smith and Mabry Kirkconnell.
And so, like a newborn animal who swaysto his feet, the process of striving for a democratic island continued.After Mr. Franklin Smith's resignation, the Governor called fora by-election and the vacant seat was quickly filled by Mr. HaigBodden.
The debating and arguing and even discordwithin the government of 1989 and 1990 did not stop, as was amplyrepresented by the events of November last year.
There are so many instances throughout historywhen a government is overthrown or taken over by an oppositionparty, an action usually defined as a Coup d'etat. Using violentor illegal measures to obtain power, it sometimes remains questionablewhether the victorious leaders are serving the interests of theirown nations, given their undemocratic and ruthless means to implementgovernment.
Such radical political behaviour is mostcertainly not applicable to this very peaceful nation of the CaymanIslands.
There are those who would argue that itdoes no harm to be occasionally reminded of the machinations playedout by certain foreign governments that lead without the consentof its citizens and whose politicians, having broken laws in orderto achieve their ambitions, cause untold damage.
But surely such open expression of differingopinions and questioning of constitutional laws and rules is theproper way to go about making sure that the best interests ofthe nation are at the forefront of anything else. In these terms,Cayman's political history is fairly exemplary for its continuousfocus on pursuing a democratic system and endeavouring alwaysto do what is right for the island and its people.
This island is in the very fortunate positionof having remained untouched and unscarred by a full-scale Coupd'etat.