Back in August 2012, the " government has appointed a new Constitutional Commission to conduct a comprehensive review of the Constitution of The Bahamas, and to recommend changes to the Constitution in advance of the 40th anniversary of Independence next year. These changes will require a national referendum to be held in due course so that the will of the people can be determined on the matter…" Find out more here…
Several groups and/or persons have made recommendations, so here are some points for consideration from me:
- Should the Prime Minister be subject to term limits of 10 years?
- Should Members of Parliament be subject to term limits of 15 years?
- Should a Constitutional limit for the National Debt and Budget Deficits be set? Maybe as a percentage of GDP.
- Should it limit the number of Cabinet Ministers and Members of Parliament based on the population count?
- Should it ensure that Cabinet Ministers, Members of Parliament, and various Chairmen appointed give reasons when a request or license application etc is denied?
- Should it enshrine a formal consultative process for new legislation to ensure checks and balances?
- Should it ensure that any law passed by Parliament automatically applies to Government, its agencies, departments and corporations Ministers, M.P's, and Civil Servants, as it applies to the country's citizens and businesses?
One very important test of a Constitution would be whether it protects citizens from
legislative agendas of politicians whose particular self-interest is to
get elected to parliament. The good intentions of this group invariably
have unintended and undesirable outcomes.
You are kidding right?
Any changes made will no doubt further subject the Population to more arbitrary Control and subjugation by the Ruling elite!
If there was a shred of competence to be found we would simply follow existing rules and regulations, and to the letter!
We do not have the philosophical or ethical development in our culture to start messing with such an important Document. (not that we observe it, or the General orders but…)
Let ’em learn to balance a checkbook and learn to rationalize things properly first.
One only has to look at all legislation passed over the last 40 years to realize we create problems, which never get reviewed by the Judiciary, which according to our Current Constitution, is the proper body to examine issues arising.
No, I’m not kidding.
I agree with you 100% though.
My point is, if they are going to mess with such an important document, we’d better protect ourselves from government.
The very first question I would have, Rick, is how is this 24-person body constituted, meaning who is taking part? I see Miles Munroe at the ‘bully pulpit’; who else is at the table, besides the two eminent QCs you mention? Not a bunch of lawyers, I hope?
The 24 people reference was made in the 2004 piece. I don’t think there are 24 this go round.
I know Michael Albury from Abaco is on there. He is an impressive guy. There are one or two from the Opposition etc.
Thank you, second query, then Rick:
Given the propensity of the democratic process in The Bahamas to produce ill-informed, misguided Government administrations over the history of the country, shouldn’t the constitutional committee seek to establish a 7 to 9-person NATIONAL OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE (part appointed/part elected, demographically diverse and nationally represented, from Abaco to Inagua) to ensure an objective perspective in decisions of national importance?
N.B. The committee would ‘superintend’ even the Senate (which is supposed to do the above but has proven woefully inadequate, as it has proven in many democracies).
I think we need to understand that, it is not the Constitution that has failed us, rather we have failed it.
The Constitution is as much a philosophical document as it is a declaration of intent.
We understand neither aspect very well, nor are we qualified to mess with it.
Modifying it at this point is akin to building a race car and modifying it without running it between changes to see the effect each has!
Understand the root of our constitution before you bastardize it with the “Flavor of the day”
While written within the last 45 years, it represents principals of human decency that go way beyond even British Culture.
Principals we do not observe very often.
I think you may be right. I have located the Bahamas Constitution online courtesy of WIPO and had a quick browse:
http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/details.jsp?id=8931
For example, Section 7 on “Persons born in The Bahamas after 9th July 1973 of non-citizen parents” is crystal clear, yet it has been completely ignored, pushing a problem into the future that could have monumental consequences:
7(1) A person born in The Bahamas after 9th July 1973 neither of whose parents is a citizen of The Bahamas shall be entitled, upon making application on his attaining the age of eighteen years or within twelve months thereafter in such manner as may be prescribed, to be registered as a citizen of The Bahamas:
Provided that if he is a citizen of some country other than The Bahamas he shall not be entitled to be registered as a citizen of The Bahamas under this Article unless he renounces his citizenship of that other country, takes the oath of allegiance and makes and registers such declaration of his intentions concerning residence as may be prescribed”.
(2) Any application for registration under this Article shall be subject to such exceptions or qualifications as may be prescribed in the interests of national security or public policy.
A perfect example of our Tribalism in operation, following personalities as if they were Divine,
Ignoring the written law, Interfering with due course,
Political appointments to the Bench/ AG Office/Registrar Generals Office.
Modifying the Constitution will only change things (and not for the better) by the empowerment it is perceived to grant to Authority in charge.
Another? Fred Mitchel and his proclamation on Work Permits. He would like to think he has the power to preside, but he needs to read up on our Trade Agreement commitments, all under W.T.O. accession commitments.
Signed off on by BOTH administrations that we so blindly follow.
I married a Bahamian woman. I’m a US male citizen. If I had been a female US citizen marrying a male Bahamian,as I now understand it,
I would have gained Bahamian citizenship (dual citizenship). As a male, no such privilege is extended to me. Is this not invidious discrimination?
I tend to agree with the comments that rewriting the constitution, at this time, may well lead to more harm than good, but at least it’s a way to bring to light issues that need to be addressed.
Absolute discrimination Mr. Smith.
Back in 2002 the PLP actually agreed that that should be changed in Parliament when voting fro Constitutional Amendments. Then campaigned against it when it went to a vote, and it was soundly defeated I might add.
I found that incredible and I trust they will have the foresight to include it with any recommended changes this time.
But???…