In celebrating the 46th anniversary of our independence, I am privileged to be one of the founding fathers, having actively participated alongside Patrick John, Victor Rivierre, and Leo Austin in announcing to Her Majesty’s Government our intent to seek independence from Britain. By the grace of God, I remain the last surviving cabinet member of the government that led us to independence, and I wish to remind the nation of the contributions made by those men and women who laid the foundation of our nationhood. May the Lord guide and bless all the leaders and people of our land.
Indeed, as we prepare for our 50th anniversary, it is imperative that we revisit the process of our constitution and respond to the clarion call for change, acknowledging the need for an upgrade. I contributed to the leadership of our nation following the revolution of May 1979 and served as a former leader of our country. I made my contributions and subsequently called for proposals for electoral reform. All Dominicans should awaken to the need for constitutional change, reflecting our responsibility as caretakers for the future of Dominica.
- Advertisement -
Many have asked me about my stance on reform, and I would like to present my contributions to electoral reform.
Cabinet Secretary, Prime Minister’s Office, Roseau, Dominica
Madam,
Please accept my contribution as stipulated and requested by recent advisories from the Government of Dominica.
It is my responsibility to add my voice to the ongoing consultation on electoral reform as one of the living founding fathers of our nation. I was also the president of the ruling party and a minister of the government that sought and achieved our independence from Great Britain, which led to the establishment of our new constitution on November 3, 1978.
Let my contribution not be regarded as an attack on anyone, as was the case with my earlier contribution on dual citizenship and the constitutional prerequisites regarding candidates for election. As a consultant, I advised a prominent client who sought representation for Dominica and the region but whose intent proved spurious. I aimed to assist both political parties in Dominica in achieving an equal playing field and campaign reform, proposing a budget of $400,000 for respective parties’ campaign finance in the imminent 2019 election. This amount is far less than what current discussions involving Byron and others speculate regarding equitable campaign finance reform. Indeed, in the absence of campaign reform, the process remains tilted in favor of one party over another.
The final voice on the matter of our national direction must allow other eminent voices—local, regional, and international—to be heard, as Byron acknowledged in his report. The observers present at these discussions, as eminent authorities, should be allowed to offer their guidance. Their findings and advice should be made available to the public, as transparency is a core value of our democracy.
DIASPORA AND OVERSEAS VOTES
The role of the large population of emerging alien CBI citizens and long-estranged Dominicans, who can compete with indigenous Dominicans at home, requires attention. This situation underscores the need for registration of all citizens only in Dominica, with residency requirements of no more than five years. Consequently, the answer lies in the direction of residence set by the original intent of our constitution, which I understand was our intention. It was also our intention to have people registered in a constituency to vote in their constituency of residence. This demonstrates the rationale that one must prove residency as a condition of the right to vote. Voter ID is recommended.
I continue to believe that the focus on overseas voters may have overshadowed the reality that this focus may not be necessary. People who live here should determine the government that responds to their needs in this country, where they face its challenges and benefits.
The Byron report should be viewed through the lens of what already exists effectively and seamlessly in St. Kitts and other OECS states. We have established an economic union, free movement of people, and the pursuit of integration as outlined in the Treaty of Basseterre. Why, then, is there not a commonality of OECS electoral practices as guidelines and guardrails to protect our democracy, including voter ID cards? I believe that the Commonwealth right to vote, as defined in our constitution, is colonialist in intent and now irrele-
vant to our Republic; this right should be granted directly to OECS citizens. The unity of the region to speak with one voice was prompted by the earlier One Caribbean-St. Georges Declaration, agreed upon by Prime Ministers Maurice Bishop, Allan Louisy of St. Lucia, and myself in 1979-1980. This effort partly motivated the St. Kitts Basseterre OECS Declaration in 1981. The St. Georges Declaration—One Caribbean—was a principle of political integration.
Why are the positive aspects of other OECS states, such as the economic union and free movement of our people, not included and used as a guide for electoral reforms?
Electoral reform is a cause that could also serve discussions on our constitutional reform. Byron may have been less forceful in this regard, but we led the OECS with our Republican constitution of 1978. We are squandering the opportunity to revisit our Republic’s constitution with the fervor of this electoral reform consultation, as suggestions for improvement are intertwined. We should seek adjustments and meaningful changes to our constitution to reflect present-day advocacy. The Telford Georges report of 1999 and the short-lived initiative of Dr. NJO Liverpool deserve attention. This moment, if lost, will not easily be regained. NOW IS THE TIME.
Clearly, what demands our attention beyond Byron is the relevance of constitutional change regarding the role of our President. We agree that the current system reflects the inadequacy of that office’s influence, highlighting the urgency for constitutional change to establish a national election for that office. A constitutional change through a referendum may be imperative. The presence of a two-thirds majority of the current government in the House of Assembly has the authority to initiate this process. What are we waiting for in the context of modernization?
Indeed, Byron spoke of the evolution of the Electoral Commission, yet there has been insufficient attention to the role of the Chairman and the legitimacy of the commission’s members. The need for increased numbers seems lacking in response to recommendations. Allowing at least three non-affiliated political representatives from the Bar, private sector, and religious communities would be ideal as a bulwark for our election and democratic process. There is no doubt that the Electoral Commission has failed to fulfill its basic responsibility of cleaning the voters’ list of those who have passed away. This does not require consultation or input from a consultant; it can be done independently.
The Byron report failed to adequately address the existence of 21 constituencies, which far surpasses that of our OECS associate member states, creating an anomaly where this country has more chiefs than Indians. We may recall that it was Patrick John, as Premier in 1974, who added ten more constituencies to the existing eleven, with a possible population then of 80,000. Now, we are in the region of 72,000 or less with 21 representatives. In contrast, St. Lucia, with a much larger population of 180,000, has 17 constituencies; Antigua, with a larger population of 93,000, also has 17 parliamentary representatives; Grenada, with a population of over 124,000, has 15 representatives; and St. Vincent, with a population of 104,000, has 15 constituencies. We must adjust our representation, given that we have the smallest population in the larger OECS community, and face our economic and political reality. It is unrealistic to sustain such an overabundance of representation, as demonstrated by the low population numbers in constituencies such as Colihaut and Valley. If we don’t address this now, then when?
This can be remedied immediately by determining a number more representative of our geographical population breakdown, by simply calling on the Boundaries Commission to draw a new map of constituencies numbering no less than 11 or no more than 15. This will better serve the needs of an impoverished nation and make the number of Ministers and Ministries more realistic within our budgetary capacities, as was the case in past administrations where six or seven Ministers were the norm and were responsible and effective. Now, all parliamentary representatives seem to seek the sole purpose of becoming Ministers of Government. Gerrymandering remains a challenge for which a political balance must be sought. Proposals to form a committee from the wider community and the emergence of an Electoral Commission and Boundaries Commission with adequate financial resources may be necessary for political stability.
While local government may not have been a focus of the Byron report, it was once the grassroots foundation of our democracy and the empowerment of local leadership, which Dominica led in the region during the leadership of E.O. LeBlanc and beyond. The rules that apply to national voting should also apply to local government. Local representatives have been overshadowed by the dominance of Parliamentary representatives from central government. There is a need to reestablish a more focused local government with the resources and independence to act, which is imperative for the democratic redistribution of resources to a wider nonpartisan community.
The roles and imperatives for campaign financing are universal, and there is a clear need for clarity in setting financial campaign boundaries for respective political parties and campaign finance interventions and support. There is also a need for access to public radio and equal terms for private radio. Campaign finance reform is necessary and requires specific guidelines.
The Byron report should not be treated as a mandate without examination or held solely as a sacrosanct document against which all contributions must be weighed. There are many other opinions of equal value from experts, sages, and our citizens who contributed. This exercise has opened Pandora’s box regarding the limitations of our Constitution and must be refocused on electoral and campaign finance reform. A CNS-style national leadership to formulate and process through an advisory committee to the Electoral Commission and Central Government arising from this consultation may serve a useful purpose in allowing all ideas to contend.
We are at a pivotal phase in our history. Let wisdom, not haste, prevail as we seek to reconstruct our democratic process for a new generation. This may be this generation’s one opportunity to effect change, notwithstanding the singular focus evident in consultations about overseas voters and electioneering. I may be one crying out in the wilderness and perhaps outside the vision of this consultation. My contribution may have little influence or value, but as leaders depart, I believe future generations who inherit the decisions we make will judge us based on our responses to the constitutional and reform challenges of today. May we invite the Holy Spirit to guide us. (Dominica News Online)
