COMMENTARY

Law and Politics: When will it ever end?

by Lloyd Noel, a former Attorney General of Grenada, prominent attorney at law and political commentator

Tuesday,  November 22, 2005

From all appearances, we are becoming a country without a conscience. Because we have lived with suffering and bad governments for so many years, our very souls are now hardened to the point of indifference.

But the price of indifference today is the end of freedom tomorrow; and that prospect is neither new nor novel to us in these Spice Isles.

As a people struggling to survive, during the period of internal self-government and more so after the dawn of our so-called Independence, we had allowed ourselves to be fooled and tom-fooled by some of our political leaders, to the point where we created divisions within our own families, because of easily acquired monetary gains or high positions.

During those periods of in-depth exploitation of human rights and freedom, and gross maladministration in dealing with the business affairs of the people -- because of the ill-gotten gains of a minority while the great majority kept quiet -- our standards and long-standing principles of decent human behaviour hit rock bottom. We recovered somewhat, but we are heading back there again.

But as the late Michael Manley, former Prime Minister of Jamaica, once said ... “I assert that we cannot develop Jamaica (here Grenada) until we learn to demand the highest levels of integrity from those occupying positions of trust.” And that statement is even more relevant, material, and absolutely necessary, in our Grenada of today’s nearly complete breakdown of everything decent, and noble, and commendable, than it has ever been before.

And those who are keeping quiet inside the channels of power madness, as well as those who are silent on the outside for one reason or another -- they all would have to live with their conscience, and may even have to help pay the price when the time of reckoning comes around. And let them make no mistake about it -- all may seem slow and steadfast, but the time to give account will surely come.

And now again, in the midst of all the manmade problems that are almost grinding people to a halt, from the lack of employment and the escalating cost of living -- not to mention the stress and trauma, from the inability of so many sufferers to yet fix their homes and get their lives back to some semblance of normalcy -- the Government has embarked on another witch hunt against the MP for St. George’s Town, Hon. Peter David.

When I first heard the news on Thursday last week, the AG Elvin Nimrod and his Special Advisor, Hugh Wildman, were talking about impeachment and declaring the seat vacant to make room for a by-election in St George’s.

But on Friday evening, the claim by Mr Wildman was that since the election of Hon. David is a nullity, and the only other candidate in the election of November, 2003, was Senator Brenda Hood, she will have to be appointed as the winner and the de facto MP for St George’s Town.

Those two “legal luminaries” claim for unseating Peter David, is based on Section 31 (1) (a) of the Constitution of Grenada, made the 19th December, 1973, at the Court at Buckingham Palace in London, and having come into operation on the 7th February, 1974, in Grenada.

That Grenada Constitution Order 1973, is still in its original form, no changes or amendments have been made thereto.

It may surprise many that, in Chapter III, Part I, of that Constitution, which deals with the “Composition of Parliament” (i.e. the Grenada Parliament) from Section 23 to Section 37 thereof, the same qualification as regards nationality or citizenship applies to Senators, MPs of the House of Representatives, and to the President of the Senate and Speaker of the House of Representatives.

And in every case the Constitution states that.... “a person shall be qualified to be appointed ... if, and shall not be so qualified unless, he/(she):
(a) is a Commonwealth Citizen who has attained the age of eighteen years.
(b) has either resided in Grenada for a period of twelve months immediately before the date of his appointment or nomination, OR is domiciled and resident in Grenada at that date.”

Strangely enough, or maybe so it may seem, nowhere in the Constitution dealing with Senators or Members of Parliament (MPs), does it ever speak of citizens of Grenada, or Grenadian citizens.

Now before we achieved independent status in February 1974, we were in Associated Statehood with the United Kingdom (UK) by the 1967 Act; internal self government, while England was responsible for our foreign affairs.

But for all intents and purposes, until we achieved Independence in 1974, we were citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies under the British Nationality Act of 1948 as amended in 1958.

And by that Act, we were also classified as British subjects or Commonwealth citizens, and those classifications also included Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India etc., etc., who were all members of the Commonwealth of Nations, and whose Head of State was, and still is, Her Majesty the Queen.

The “British subject” aspect has been further amended in England since our independence, to the extent that we no longer have the right to remain in the UK indefinitely -- even though we can enter without visas.

So the qualification for MPs election under Section 30 of the Constitution of 1974, was and still is a Commonwealth citizen who has attained the age of eighteen years and resided in Grenada for at least one year before nomination date, or domiciled and resident in Grenada at the date of nomination.
Domicile is to do with the place of a person’s birth, and it is then referred to as one’s domicile of origin -- as distinct from someone’s domicile of choice.

And while you can change your domicile of choice as you wish, i.e. move from one place or country and go to live in another country -- assuming you are allowed entry, and even granted citizenship after a certain period and satisfying certain conditions -- you cannot change your domicile of origin.

And more importantly, once you have given up your domicile of choice -- by moving away from that country with the intention of resettling permanently in your own country -- your domicile of origin is automatically resumed, once you commence residing in your homeland.

And for qualification to be elected as an MP under Section 30 of the Constitution, that person has to be so resident at the date of his/her nomination.

Now, Section 31 of the Constitution deals with disqualification for membership of the House of Representatives (MPs), and it is on all fours with Section 26 for disqualification of Senators -- just as Section 30 is on all fours with Section 25 for qualification of persons to be appointed as Senators.

A person is disqualified from being elected as an MP if he “(a) is by virtue of his own act, under any acknowledgment of allegiance, obedience or adherence to a foreign power or State;”

The question therefore arises is a Commonwealth citizen, who was once domiciled in Canada and a citizen of that State (a Commonwealth State from which he departed in 1992) disqualified by virtue thereof -- on the ground that Canada is a foreign state or power?

If the answer is “Yes”, then all those sections I referred to earlier (Section 23 to 37), as well as the British Act of 1948/58 dealing with Commonwealth citizens, would be in total contradiction, and maybe even null and void. And I doubt that possibility very, very much indeed.

But based on those sections, and in particular Section 31, the AG and his Advisor are more or less confident that Peter David’s Election is a nullity, and Senator Brenda Hood will soon be resigning as a Member of the Upper House (the Senate), and taking her rightful place in the Lower House of Representatives as MP for the Town of St George’s.

If that scenario could come to pass by law (Section 31), then we may soon even be seeing, Senators and MPs of Cuban or Chinese nationality seating in the Lower and Upper Houses of Parliament.

And if and when the above also comes to pass, then may the good “Jah” protect and keep us in bondage always.
We heard all the nonsense about real estate fraud by Peter David in New York, and how he should resign, or be investigated by the Leader of the Opposition. That seemed to have died a natural death.

With this latest breaking news, the Special Advisor may well be retaining Senior Counsel from Trinidad and Tobago to file High Court proceedings against Peter David -- at taxpayers’ expense as usual.

The Dipcon “sure-to-win claim,” that the same Advisor was bringing to wipe out the Privy Council judgment against Government, is smouldering somewhere in limbo, while the interest on those $18 millions continue to double up.

Even the case for the same Advisor against the JLSC, for refusing to recommend his appointment as Attorney General of Grenada -- my reliable information is that one of the members of the JLSC have deposed that the decision was unanimous, and not as our PSC Chairperson had given the impression that she had objected and was in the minority.

I wonder who is paying for that highly publicised case by the same Trinidad and Tobago Senior Counsel.

Yet the witch hunt continues against Peter and George Worme and Grenada Today -- as well as some others who are speaking up and out against the wrong doings in our midst.

Where and when will it ever end?

How could there ever be reconciliation and genuine forgiveness when the only programmes that get headline publicity and persisted with, are revengeful, vindictive and malicious, and are manufactured with no other motivation but to defame and castigate others, with no justification?

The only consolation -- amidst the on-going trials and tribulation -- is that what goes around is surely bound to come around.

  Back...

  Most popular articles: viewed, printed and e-mailed

  Printable version