Happy 40th Independence Anniversary Bahamas... ...Enormous Challenges Ahead for the Bahamian People and Nation

The road to reform

PM places focus on constitutional change

By Candia Dames
Guardian News Editor
candia@nasguard.com

This week will be a week of celebration in The Bahamas as the country observes its 40th anniversary of independence.

But it is also being marked by debate over what kind of nation we have built since July 10, 1973.

Bahamians everywhere know what the challenges are for us at this time: High crime, a still shaky economy, poor socialization, educational challenges and a lack of economic empowerment, which was the topic of last week’s National Review.

Prime Minister Perry Christie has also decided that the 40th anniversary is an ideal time to take another stab at constitutional reform.

This morning, he is set to receive the report of the Constitutional Commission, which was headed by former Attorney General Sean McWeeney, QC.

The report to be presented to the prime minister at the British Colonial Hilton hotel this morning is expected to make significant recommendations.

The question of citizenship and the inability of Bahamian women married to foreign men to automatically pass citizenship on to their children was among the issues addressed by the McWeeney commission.

At the time of the commission’s appointment last year, Christie said, “It’s a very important issue and it’s one that we indicated that we are prepared to put to the people of the country.”

ABERRATION

Explaining how this provision ended up in the constitution, Governor General Sir Arthur Foulkes, who was a part of constitutional negotiations in 1972, said in a recent interview, “The argument was that in matters of citizenship the international practice was that the women follow the men and I suppose that was true.

“Some of us took the position that at this time, you know the world is moving on, and that women should be equal in every respect, including bequeathing citizenship on their foreign spouses and their children [we believed that it should be equal].

“There should be no difference between getting citizenship between the mother and the father. The British government did not agree with that at the time, and so we still have what I regard as an aberration in our constitution and it is a matter now that we have debated before and it is a matter now that I believe the Constitutional Commission is looking at again.

“What you see today is what exists in the constitution, that there should be a difference between the acquisition of citizenship between the male and the female and that was the fundamental difference and the British government of course prevailed on that issue.”

Former Cabinet Minister George Smith, who was also a part of the official delegation to the Constitutional Conference in 1972, agreed that it is time to clear up any misrepresentation about the question of citizenship.

“All those people who were born in The Bahamas prior to 1973 should be made citizens of The Bahamas unless there is some security reasons for them not to be,” Smith said.

“So we have some weighty issues to address in our constitution. The only way we can do it is to take away any political division and look very maturely at what changes ought to be made, how we can modernize it, how we could celebrate citizenship and put the question to the Bahamian people in a way where the Bahamian people understand that the leaders of our country have looked at these issues and they agree on them.

“This is why it is important for both sides of the political divide to come together as one, to look at the document, agree on it and even have some all party conference prior to it going to the people in a referendum, so that when it gets to the people in a referendum a simple question is put, not a complicated question.”

MODERN

Sir Arthur opined that while reform is a good thing, The Bahamas has a modern constitution.

“We have a constitution that guarantees, with the exception of what we talked about earlier, rights and those rights are spelt out in our constitution,” he said.

“Our system of governance, it’s a good system and our constitution is based on the idea of parliamentary democracy and one of the fundamentals of that is this, and sometimes people forget this, the fundamental idea of a parliamentary democracy is that a people are governed by their own elected representatives.

“That’s the bottom line and all the other things are built on that foundation and we have been governed by our own elected representatives and in the last 40 years we’ve had, I think, four changes of government and they’ve all gone smoothly and at the end of the day when it is time for election, in our system of governance there’s no question about who is responsible.”

Sir Arthur said the citizenship issue is the most pressing issue crying for reform.

But he said, “We have to be very careful that we don’t tamper with the fundamentals of our constitution.

“For instance, I hear people talk about term limits (for the prime minister). Why do we want to import elements of a different kind of constitution, the American constitution, into our constitution where obviously they do not fit?

“...I don’t think Bahamians would like that. I think Bahamians ought to decide through their political parties who they want to lead us. If they want someone to lead us for five years, fine, 10 years, fine, 15 years [fine]. It should be a choice for the Bahamian people.”

The governor general also believes this might be an appropriate juncture to re-examine the role of the Senate.

He said both the Progressive Liberal Party and the Free National Movement have used the Senate in ways not originally contemplated.

“The idea of the Senate was supposed to be at the end of the day your senior politicians, your statesmen would sit in that [august] House. That’s why we call it the upper House and that’s why the title you attach is honorable.

“These are men and women who have been through the system, who are senior, who are mature. These are the people who should be sitting in the upper House. Both political parties for the same reasons really have decided to use the Senate as a training ground and as a consolation prize for defeated candidates and that has undermined the whole idea of the Senate and this idea of its seniority and statesmanship and all of that.”

MONARCHY

Loftus Roker, a former minister in the Pindling cabinet who also attended the 1972 talks, pointed out that many Bahamians do not understand their constitution.

“I don’t believe it is taught in the schools or anything,” he said. “I don’t believe we know what the constitution is all about. A constitution is the basis of our sovereignty and to willy nilly change that in my view is folly because if the average person believes this is only a piece of paper and you could tear it up and put another piece of paper there any time you like, that’s trouble.”

It is not clear at this point whether the McWeeney commission will recommend The Bahamas move away from the monarchy.

“I know the monarchy bothers a lot of people and it used to bother me too,” Roker said.

“You know when I was a student in London I decided one of the first things I will do if I get the chance is to move Queen Victoria’s statue from where it is and throw it in the ocean. It’s in Parliament Square…I don’t want nothing to do with it. It is still there.

“I discovered that there is something called history and you shouldn’t try to destroy history and history would still be there even if you destroyed it. You can’t give it away and we need to know what happened so we can know where we are going.”

Roker noted that the queen at no time has any power to do anything without the advice and instruction of the government of The Bahamas.

She is purely a figurehead represented in The Bahamas by the governor general.

Roker said the decision was made to leave the queen as a figurehead to comfort people who feared independence.

“We left her there as a symbol,” he said. “That is why we also kept the Privy Council because they were saying Bahamian judges and all of that were going to do all sorts of foolish things. And we decided we would leave the Privy Council there as some last resort that you can go to that we don’t influence.”

REFERENDUM

This is the second such commission appointed by Christie.

He appointed the first on December 23, 2002, and mandated it to carry out a comprehensive review and make recommendations that would strengthen fundamental freedoms and civil and political rights of the individual, and critically examine the structure of the executive authority.

Important work was done by commission chairs, the late former Attorney General Paul L. Adderley and Harvey Tynes, QC, who, together with the other members of that commission, traveled the country extensively, holding town meetings and gathering the views of Bahamians on what they would like to see changed.

But that commission died a swift death — as did its recommendations — when in 2007, the Free National Movement (FNM) was re-elected.

Hubert Ingraham, prime minister at the time, was weary of dealing with constitutional issues and proposing reforms.

At his first press conference as newly re-elected prime minister at the Cabinet Office one Sunday, he declared to reporters that there would be no more referenda under his watch.

Five years earlier, Bahamian voters overwhelmingly rejected key questions put to them in a referendum brought by the Ingraham administration.

The current Christie administration has already revealed that it intends to call a referendum intended to eliminate discriminatory clauses from the constitution.

This is what Ingraham attempted back in February 2002. But the perhaps pure intentions of the then government were overshadowed by a divisive political climate and the issues of the referendum were derailed.

There is a tendency for politics in The Bahamas to overshadow much.

In some circles, there exists the view, for instance, that the independence celebrations are PLP celebrations.

The current Constitutional Commission has had a strong mix of well-respected Bahamian professionals. Former Attorney General Carl Bethel was the opposition’s representative.

We shall have to wait and see whether the process leading to the next constitutional referendum is able to proceed without the smear of political posturing.

If not, reform could once again be impossible to achieve.

July 08, 2013

thenassauguardian

Sir Arthur Foulkes: A Father and Founder of the Bahamian Nation

Sir Arthur Foulkes: A Father of the Nation at the 40th

By Simon

A moving and fitting prelude to midnight on the 40th anniversary of independence would be a group of young Bahamians reciting the Preamble to the Constitution which begins: “Whereas four hundred and eighty-one years ago the rediscovery of this family of islands, rocks and cays heralded the rebirth of the New World”.

Many of us are familiar with the poetic relish which introduces the supreme law of the land, a statement of our democratic convictions, inclusive of a charter of freedoms and rights.

There will be one personage even more familiar with the Preamble and the document it introduces. Sir Arthur Foulkes, the eighth Bahamian governor general, drafted the original preamble for the 1969 Constitution.

Though modified for inclusion in the independence Constitution, the heart and thrust of the Preamble flowed from the imagination of one of the modern Bahamas’ more prolific scribes.

School children in the U.S. read about that nation’s founders and constitutional fathers, admiring and honoring them through film, statues and folklore.

In Sir Arthur, the nation enjoys a living father and founder. That he is head of state at the 40th anniversary of independence is a happy and extraordinary privilege for the nation. Other than Arthur D. Hanna, there is no other living Bahamian more suited to preside over our independence celebrations.

When the tricolor gold, black and aquamarine flag is raised against the backdrop of the near midnight sky at Clifford Park next week, invoking independence eve 40 years ago, Sir Arthur will rightly preside.

Flourished

Though one may only guess at the thoughts and emotions that will fill his heart and mind, history will be smiling with him, and the sovereign, democratic and free commonwealth of which he helped to give birth and stability. The nation, like Sir Arthur, has more than survived. Both have flourished.

Born at the farthest end of the archipelago in Mathew Town, Inagua, Sir Arthur’s Bahamian vision encompassed racial, social and economic equality for all Bahamians. He remains a central figure and an icon of the struggle for majority rule and independence.

He was a founding member of the National Committee for Positive Action, an internal pressure group which proved pivotal in the struggle, radicalizing a sometimes cautious PLP.

As early as 1959 the committee held a debate on independence. The NCPA is a case history in political organizing, with no similar group as successful in modern Bahamian history.

Sir Arthur was one the movement’s key strategic thinkers, and certainly its best wordsmith, penning much of the poetry and prose which moved a people and instructed colonialists and others of the rightness and urgency of the cause of freedom in The Bahamas.

With a body of work that includes a career in journalism, memorable speeches – his own and many he wrote for others – as well as half a century as a columnist, Sir Arthur has been one of the country’s leading public intellectuals. In his commitment to social justice and his elegance as a writer he is our Bahamian José Martí.

His body of writing is expansive and his was a familiar and eloquent voice on political platforms throughout the archipelago. He was the driving force behind and editor of Bahamian Times, an indispensable tool in the struggle for racial and social equality.

With the help of a few faithful volunteers including George A. Smith, another surviving constitutional father, Sir Arthur produced the weekly from 1963 until 1967. The newspaper’s office on Wulff Road was a forum for political activists.

Sir Arthur’s prose extended to national documents which also gave voice to freedom’s call. He helped the PLP prepare its contributions for the 1964 Constitution. During his participation in the 1972 independence constitutional talks in London, he and the opposition FNM pressed the case for full equality for women, which the PLP resolutely opposed.

Turmoil

With the Colony of The Bahamas in turmoil because of rising expectations of democratic freedoms amidst the suppression of the aspirations of the majority, the PLP, urged on by the NCPA, heightened its political activity, using nonviolent direct action.

To protest against the UBP’s stubborn refusal to create fair electoral boundaries a three-part strategy included: the events of Black Tuesday, a boycott of the House of Assembly, and a petition to the U.N.’s Committee of 24, the committee on decolonization.

The petition was a comprehensive plea to the U.N. about the dire state of affairs in the colony, and the collusion between the white oligarchy and the British government to lock the majority out of political and economic power.

Designed to embarrass the British government into acting, the petition covered matters ranging from the lack of labor laws to insidiously unfair boundary arrangements.

Others like Warren Levarity, Jeffrey Thompson and Simeon Bowe contributed to the effort but it was left to Sir Arthur Foulkes to pen the final document. It was described by a U.N. official as one the best ever presented to the committee.

As an aside, it speaks to the character of Sir Arthur that he was able to vigorously oppose U.K. colonial rule, and yet serve graciously and with no malice towards the British as high commissioner to the Court of St. James, eventually becoming the Queen’s representative.

All heroes and heroines have clay feet. Yet there is a genius or courage in them which inspires in their fellow citizens a desire to memorialize the marbled stature and singular contribution of such heroes.

Nelson Mandela’s 27 years imprisonment on Robben Island, his endurance, along with that of other freedom fighters was the ground of sacrifice in which democracy took root and from which it sprang in South Africa.

Freedom fighters like Sir Cecil Wallace-Whitfield and Sir Arthur bent the arc of freedom here at home, enduring much to help secure Bahamian democracy. As PLPs they labored for racial equality, helping to form the first majority rule government in 1967.

Bigger

For Sir Cecil and Sir Arthur, freedom’s cause was bigger than a single party or personality, indeed the two men often went their separate ways. Yet, they enjoyed a singular democratic conviction.

In the eventuality, they quickly left the comforts of power for the slog of opposition, which endured for a quarter of a century, as the powers that be sought to destroy them with unyielding and vicious tactics.

Alarmed at the early autocratic inclinations of Sir Lynden, the cult of personality being created around him, broken promises and the abandonment of collegiality, Sir Cecil, Sir Arthur and six fellow dissidents broke from their political home to provide others in the movement with a new home from which to realize the values and ideas of the broader movement for social justice.

Their brave actions ensured a vibrant two-party system. The FNM helped save Bahamian democracy. Both Sir Lynden Pindling and Arthur Hanna often stated that few sacrificed more for the movement than Sir Arthur.

Sir Cecil died before the FNM’s election to office in 1992. Twenty-one years later Sir Arthur is still flourishing. Having pledged his governor generalship to the youth of the commonwealth he has performed in office with vigor and dignity.

Having been at home in both major political parties, he counts friends in both. The beauty of our system and a pride of 40 years of independence is that we have a PLP government and a governor general appointed on the recommendation of an FNM administration. This is not bipartisanship. This is nonpartisanship.

By personality and by democratic conviction, Sir Arthur pledged to represent all Bahamians. He has done so gracefully, and with no hint of partisanship. He is beloved by FNMs and PLPs alike. He is a true symbol of unity.

Sir Arthur’s Bahamian journey represents the best of the Bahamian spirit, and the enduring struggle for what is essentially good about us as a people.

Even as we recall our failings as a nation, there is much to celebrate. This is certainly Sir Arthur’s conviction. He should know. He knows whence we came, and delights in the possibilities of current and future generations.

To have Sir Arthur as a father of the nation at the 40th is more than a privilege. His presence, and his vigilance as a fellow citizen pay testimony and witness to a history of struggle and transcendence by a proud people committed to equality and freedom. It is a history worthy of celebration and emulation.

July 04, 2013

thenassauguardian

Bahamas Blog International

Bahamas: Bahamians want, need and crave to live in a land where they are more than spectators looking in on the doings of those who are really large and in charge...

Dreamers, Visionaries and Workers
The Bahama Journal Editorial


The Bahamian people are not really asking for that much.

In the ultimate analysis, then, our people want systems that work; they want institutions that are up to the challenge of delivering the goods – and clearly they want to live in safe and secure communities.

In truth, the Bahamian people are not asking for too much.

But just as surely, little of this can or will be achieved if Bahamians continue to repose so little confidence in themselves and people who look like them.

This mindset must be purged sooner rather than later; this because there is no one better situated than the Bahamian for understanding his own hurts, his own delinquencies and thereafter his own set of responsibilities to the self and others.

Here we are ever optimistic that, a time will come when Bahamians in greater numbers will realize that, while some of them are called to lead in the political realm; some others in the Church and some others in business and the unions, are also so called.

In addition, there are some others – the dreamers, visionaries and workers – who also have their full parts to play in the unfolding drama that is nation-building in today’s nascent Bahamas.

That Bahamas - like a host of other small island developing states – is a work in progress.

Clearly, then, no one should pretend surprise when some things go awry; when mistakes are made and when those who lead stray far from some of their own windy rhetoric.

But for sure, The Bahamas does have a lot that it could be justly proud of; here whether the reference is made to some of the changes that have taken place in the political realm or for that matter in the world of business.

On occasion, we have sought to make and underscore our fervent belief that, Bahamians should be given a chance to come on over and build up their nation and its institutions; inclusive of those that have to do with the provision of vitally needed public goods such as health, safety and education.

And yet again, we have also sought to make the point that there is an urgent need for those who make the law and those who would carry out the law to recognize that Bahamians want, need and crave to live in a land where they are more than spectators looking in on the doings of those who are really large and in charge.

But for sure, even as we hold to these views, we are today absolutely convinced that there remains a large role for so-called foreigners to make in the orderly growth and development of these islands, rocks and cays.

Evidently, therefore, there is a large role that could and should be played by people like Sarkis Izmirlian who resides in Lyford Cay and who on more occasions that one suggested that, these islands have become home to him.

In support of this, Izmirlian not only continues to dream big dreams about the future viability of this nation’s economy, but has sought -with the Bahama Mar venture- to see to it that our beloved country and its people remains on the cutting edge of tourism in this region.

As we have already noted, this is one of the reasons for choosing him to be our Person of the Year.

This man has lived in the Bahamas for 20 years and considers the archipelago his home.

We also so believe.

When asked elsewhere in media for some explanation behind his vision for Cable Beach, Izmirlian is said to have noted that, that even after protracted delays, giving up on the Baha Mar project was never an option.

As he is to be quoted: "It's very simple, my dedication comes from my belief in the project. And so as the world moves forward with trepidation, we in The Bahamas move forward with confidence to create a project that will change the lives of Bahamians forever. We have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to move our tourism sector forward."

If things go according to plan, the Bahamian people writ large will be able to serve, earn and thereby find the resources necessary to help them fortify family life; nurture their communities; therefore helping to shore up and build the
Bahamian Nation.

Here –and for sure - many hands will make a burden light.

As we know so very well, people succeed when they work to see to it that other people succeed in realizing their visions or dreams.

And so, it is with our people as they struggle with the vicissitudes that come whenever seven years of drought set in.

Happily, while some despair, some others dare dream of the coming of a better day – and thereafter work to make it happen.

January 19, 2011

The Bahama Journal Editorial

Bahamas Blog International