The recent assumption of direct rule of the Turks and Caicos Islands (TCI) by Britain, following a Commission of Inquiry report that found “a high probability of systemic corruption”, has generated some interesting and diverse comments from several quarters of relevance to the Cayman Islands.

The Financial Times, as befitting a bastion of capitalism, tends to focus on the financial aspects, referring to the “financial burden Britain faces in running jurisdictions that are relics of the empire but now play a role in the world financial system.”

According to the newspaper, a wider British clampdown on governance is being watched closely in other overseas territory offshore centres dealing with graft allegations, such as the Cayman Islands.

Granted, Britain may well end up footing the bill for the administrative cleanup in the TCI simply because there is reportedly no money left in the TCI treasury to do so, as a result of the spendthrift and incompetent behaviour of the local politicians.

Cayman, on the other hand, was considered to be able to pay for its own Commission of Inquiry, corruption investigations and Judicial Tribunal, even if the Governor had to exercise his reserve powers in order to force the issue.

According to The Financial Times, the imposition of direct rule in the TCI has sparked debate over the future of other British tax havens such as the Cayman Islands “as they grapple with suspected public corruption of their own” and it may well be that such debate in Britain will spill over to the community here.

Another British publication, the Socialist Worker, predictably follows the same line of thought as the ousted TCI ministers in its reference to “agents of the British state” overthrowing the elected government of the TCI, continuing that “The coup has cast light onto the question of the remaining British territories around the world.”

However, according to the Socialist Worker, it is the very nature of the micro-state that causes the corruption problem, and the British intervention will not change that. Further, the main issue is financial, it says, with Britain maintaining these micro-states as corrupt playgrounds for the rich.

And perhaps the newspaper has indeed come up with the real reason for the long-standing dragging of feet in granting enforceable human rights to the people of the Cayman Islands: “Ordinary people who live in any of these states will not have serious rights until the rule of the rich is curtailed.”

The Socialist Worker concludes on a somewhat cynical note: “People in TCI who hope that the governor will bring them justice are missing the point – he is a representative of the power that set the tax-dodgers to rule over them.”

Whether this point of view strikes any chord here remains to be seen.

The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) also weighed in on the TCI takeover last week, condemning Britain’s decision to dissolve the government and the legislature, as well as to suspend the right to trial by jury of one of its associate members.

According to CARICOM, the action is counterproductive and the democratic process within the region cannot be strengthened by removing representative democracy from the citizens of the Islands.

However, the response of TCI residents to CARICOM’s position seems to one of rejection, typically asking where was CARICOM when the elected ministers were robbing the country blind.

It seems to us that this is fair comment. CARICOM as a body has no room to criticise the British actions to correct what was perceived to be fatally flawed misconduct on the part of the elected TCI government when it has no mechanism itself to intervene or otherwise deal with such situations – whether in associate or full member states.

There have been a number of occasions in recent years when concerned residents in CARICOM member states have called upon the regional organisation to intervene in some fashion in relation to allegations of corruption and similar misconduct, but it has seemingly been powerless or unwilling to do so.

It may well be, therefore, that many citizens in several independent CARICOM countries wish they had an overriding administrative power to protect them from the excesses of their own democratically elected representatives.

The message to be derived from all of this is that the role of Britain in relation to its overseas territories is up for debate as never before in recent memory, as indeed is the role of the territories themselves in the global economy.

This, of course, affects the Cayman Islands as one of the overseas territories and the government and other local stakeholders would be well advised to bear this in mind in the coming months.