By: Chris Burke
The United Nations has a long-standing history of advocating to end world colonialism. In so doing, decades ago, the UN general assembly created a special committee for decolonization to work specifically to eradicate colonization in the world. We learn that the UN special committee will meet in Kingstown, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, from May 31 to June 2 in its annual convention.
Turks and Caicos Islands is scheduled on the agenda for discussion, along with the other remaining 15 non-self-governing territories.
The United Nations General Assembly has declared all forms of colonialism incompatible with the principles of international law, and as such supports the colonies' ability to preserve the cultural identity and national unity of Territories under their administration, encouraging the full development of indigenous cultures so as to facilitate “the unfettered exercise of the right of self-determination”. The UN has unrelentingly reaffirmed its committment calling for an end to colonialism and calling for the governing powers to grant colonies the right to achieve genuine self-government and economic self-reliance.
The call for self determination is particularly important for one of the last remaining 16 colonies, Turks and Caicos Islands (TCI) in the Caribbean. TCI was a self governing territory of the United Kingdom whose government fell to the UK powers on August 14, 2009 amidst allegations of local government corruption.
Shortly thereafter, the United Nations specifically addressed the matter of Turks and Caicos on September 23, 2009, condemning UK’s actions in Turks and Caicos. In Section X (4) of the UN report, the United Nations addresses Turks and Caicos Islands’ direct rule by Great Britain and specifically calls for, “restoration of constitutional arrangements providing for representative democracy through elected territorial Government as soon as possible.” The UN also declared UK’s actions in Turks and Caicos is a "clear step in the wrong direction."
The UN should know and understand when discussing the UK’s seizing of Turks and Caicos, that the TCI citizens’ have suffered a complete loss of democracy, right to trial by jury and right to vote on any matter or for their own local leader.
Since the UK takeover of Turks and Caicos, the entire populace has been governed under a literal dictatorial political system, ongoing now for two years. In these two years, the special corruption team installed by the UK has discovered no proof of corruption, issued no indictments, scheduled no trials. Yet, the entire populace has been victims of democracy injustice and other abuses by the UK, merely predicated on the alleged wrong doing of just a handful of people. Nonetheless, the UK maintains that the people must wait until after it imposes its own constitution on the islands, a new constitution that will forcefully replace the constitution created by the TCI people in 2006 which demonstrated no constitutional failings of any kind.
It is every democracy-loving citizen’s hope that the UN’s Chairman of the Special Committee, Ambassador Francisco Carrión-Mena of Ecuador, will intervene on behalf of the citizens of TCI who have had their democracy forcibly taken. The UN is urged to make an inquiry and its own findings as to the new UK constitution, findings show that it will permanently take democracy and self determination from the TCI people giving UK ultimate power there, as it has been enjoying for the last two years. An UN inquiry is even more important because the UK refuses to allow a referendum on the new constitution and is relying solely on collecting “suggestions” from the citizens instead of using a democratic method of weighing the will of the people.
The over-reaching political system that the UK has established in Turks and Caicos has many trickle down affects, such as the disappearance of the local treasury, the firing of local citizens from their jobs (replaced by British nationals) and certainly not least the forcible eviction of average citizens from their lands. The British have also allegedly been engaging in special interest contracts in the Turks and Caicos including government health care contracts as well as land development, which is suspected to have contributed to this government takeover zeal.
Every world citizen should uphold the Turks and Caicos citizens’ right to democracy and self determination. We hold the UN to a higher standard and specifically call for it to be incumbent on the UN to investigate the political failings by the UK and taking of rights and freedoms from the Turks and Caicos people.
Showing posts with label constitution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label constitution. Show all posts
Thursday, May 26, 2011
Sunday, May 22, 2011
United Kingdom is Nation Building in the British West Indies - Turks and Caicos, a Cautionary Tale
By: AG Karn
Most of the world is caught in a quagmire of political ignorance when it comes to British dealings in the West Indies [Caribbean]. The lines have been confused with well publicized stories of political corruption in these nation's governments contrasted with a new movement of British saviourship.
In the case of Turks and Caicos, we have such a case of confusion. Bridging the gap of national solidarity between the local people is a difficult task when there remains a disconnect concerning national solidarity and the British governance system. The British passport system for example catches one off guard, and travel is not the problem. Atop the passport of British Nationals are the words inscribed, "Nationals of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland for the purposes of Community Law". This inscription is unique to British National's passports, it distinguishes rights and benefits from the passports belonging to those of the British Overseas Territories. Though both passports are issued by the British government, there are clear distinctions of partiality and lack of rights to those with British Overseas Territory passports. Citizenship, rights and benefits are clearly not awarded by a passport issued by the British government.
The long-lived historic intention of the colonial relationship between the British and the West Indies was trade and nothing more. Under British colonial economic policies after 1870 the British government did not extend any imperial credit or loans to their colonies. Very little credit was extended at all barring exceptional circumstances such as hurricanes. This policy was enacted by the British to distance their duties and obligations to their overseas territories and has only changed in very recent history.
In the past, the economics of the overseas territories was left to the ambition of the local governments whose success was defined by the movers and shakers in a sink or swim contest. The territories were largely abandoned by Westminster who scolded the territories to "figure it out" with requests of financial needs or services. These days, there is no real trade relationship with the British. Many overseas territories rely very little on trade and much on creating foreign business relationships for tourism to generate revenue. Since the territories were on their own financially, the mentality “if you got, use it” worked. The Turks and Caicos Islands was quite successful with that plan, they had tourism potential and they used it to earn an almost unheard of revenue that eventually caught the eye of the British government. The movers and shakers making these deals were exposed to unknown pitfalls of inherent grey areas as prescribed but not defined by the British government. Ultimately, Westminster at its whim accused Turks and Caicos government of corruption involving business deals with foreign resort developers.
Because of the blurry boundaries and evolving relationships between Westminster and the British Overseas Territories, the risk of political turmoil in these regions became great as nations in the region were unaware of Westminster's new "devotion" to them.
Since 2006, nation building has become the new political charge of the British in the Overseas Territories. What was once a trade exploitation relationship with the colonies has recently evolved into true imperialism with empire ambition to take back its territories as the British see advantageous. At the nucleus of this ambition is British desire for wealth and world power.
Such political instability and uncertainty in the West Indies caused by the British is no accident. Keeping the British Overseas Territories in a state of uncertainty as to their citizenship, allegiance and financial security has assisted the new British empire ambition. This confusion caused British Overseas Territories to fail to bond as nations and has left the door wide open for the British to interfere and create political rivalries as needed for political goals.
We now find that the British are nation building in Turks and Caicos Islands after they seized the islands back in 2009. The British excuse their encroachment on the Turks and Caicos islands as correcting poor governance and punishing local corruption. Turning a blind eye to true government abuse is wrong when there is a dire necessity to intervene when cruelty or brutality is involved. The Turks and Caicos government had no such circumstance when the British unilaterally decided to burden their will there. The British will have a difficult time overcoming their legacy of colonialism.
One might say that the movers and shakers of the Turks and Caicos government were mistaken in their assumption that they had authority to make business deals even when Westminster was half-heartedly supervising. The British established no policies to keep British overseas governments from crossing British policies, as artificial as they might have been. In fact, local laws supporting Turks and Caicos government actions that the British now call corrupt were in place.
The fact that Westminster had the authority to warn, counsel or enact a “no confidence ruling” against the Turks and Caicos government has no bearing on its explanation to bypass all remedies and forge head-on in appropriating the Turks and Caicos government. In fact, there was little need for any kind of impedance by the British at all, yet they took the dramatic and unnecessary leap of seizing and misappropriating government powers from the people of the islands.
I earlier expressed my views that the British re-presence in the West Indies and Turks and Caicos is based on greed, power and empire building. Now that the British are less concerned with trade in the West Indies they have shifted their focus to benefiting from foreign developers with enormous wealth. In this way the British have in a sense created an extortion relationship with the foreign investors of Turks and Caicos by forcing them to be shackled in punitive financial and legal obligations to the British government. In turn, this has opened the door for British developers who share a close political relationship with the British government. British developers are almost an extension of the British government enjoying multitudes of shared foreign contracts, subsidies and tax breaks; the British government can now profit from development in their own territories instead of handing over the spoils to foreign developers.
The final nail in the coffin is the new constitution in Turks and Caicos which will solidify Westminster's motives. I suspect that other British Overseas Territories are next on the list. Entities such as CARICOM were created to act as a proxy representative of the nations in the region. British Overseas Territories would be well advised to form a coalition either separately or with CARICOM to assist one another in these modern colonial times.
Most of the world is caught in a quagmire of political ignorance when it comes to British dealings in the West Indies [Caribbean]. The lines have been confused with well publicized stories of political corruption in these nation's governments contrasted with a new movement of British saviourship.
In the case of Turks and Caicos, we have such a case of confusion. Bridging the gap of national solidarity between the local people is a difficult task when there remains a disconnect concerning national solidarity and the British governance system. The British passport system for example catches one off guard, and travel is not the problem. Atop the passport of British Nationals are the words inscribed, "Nationals of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland for the purposes of Community Law". This inscription is unique to British National's passports, it distinguishes rights and benefits from the passports belonging to those of the British Overseas Territories. Though both passports are issued by the British government, there are clear distinctions of partiality and lack of rights to those with British Overseas Territory passports. Citizenship, rights and benefits are clearly not awarded by a passport issued by the British government.
The long-lived historic intention of the colonial relationship between the British and the West Indies was trade and nothing more. Under British colonial economic policies after 1870 the British government did not extend any imperial credit or loans to their colonies. Very little credit was extended at all barring exceptional circumstances such as hurricanes. This policy was enacted by the British to distance their duties and obligations to their overseas territories and has only changed in very recent history.
In the past, the economics of the overseas territories was left to the ambition of the local governments whose success was defined by the movers and shakers in a sink or swim contest. The territories were largely abandoned by Westminster who scolded the territories to "figure it out" with requests of financial needs or services. These days, there is no real trade relationship with the British. Many overseas territories rely very little on trade and much on creating foreign business relationships for tourism to generate revenue. Since the territories were on their own financially, the mentality “if you got, use it” worked. The Turks and Caicos Islands was quite successful with that plan, they had tourism potential and they used it to earn an almost unheard of revenue that eventually caught the eye of the British government. The movers and shakers making these deals were exposed to unknown pitfalls of inherent grey areas as prescribed but not defined by the British government. Ultimately, Westminster at its whim accused Turks and Caicos government of corruption involving business deals with foreign resort developers.
Because of the blurry boundaries and evolving relationships between Westminster and the British Overseas Territories, the risk of political turmoil in these regions became great as nations in the region were unaware of Westminster's new "devotion" to them.
Since 2006, nation building has become the new political charge of the British in the Overseas Territories. What was once a trade exploitation relationship with the colonies has recently evolved into true imperialism with empire ambition to take back its territories as the British see advantageous. At the nucleus of this ambition is British desire for wealth and world power.
Such political instability and uncertainty in the West Indies caused by the British is no accident. Keeping the British Overseas Territories in a state of uncertainty as to their citizenship, allegiance and financial security has assisted the new British empire ambition. This confusion caused British Overseas Territories to fail to bond as nations and has left the door wide open for the British to interfere and create political rivalries as needed for political goals.
We now find that the British are nation building in Turks and Caicos Islands after they seized the islands back in 2009. The British excuse their encroachment on the Turks and Caicos islands as correcting poor governance and punishing local corruption. Turning a blind eye to true government abuse is wrong when there is a dire necessity to intervene when cruelty or brutality is involved. The Turks and Caicos government had no such circumstance when the British unilaterally decided to burden their will there. The British will have a difficult time overcoming their legacy of colonialism.
One might say that the movers and shakers of the Turks and Caicos government were mistaken in their assumption that they had authority to make business deals even when Westminster was half-heartedly supervising. The British established no policies to keep British overseas governments from crossing British policies, as artificial as they might have been. In fact, local laws supporting Turks and Caicos government actions that the British now call corrupt were in place.
The fact that Westminster had the authority to warn, counsel or enact a “no confidence ruling” against the Turks and Caicos government has no bearing on its explanation to bypass all remedies and forge head-on in appropriating the Turks and Caicos government. In fact, there was little need for any kind of impedance by the British at all, yet they took the dramatic and unnecessary leap of seizing and misappropriating government powers from the people of the islands.
I earlier expressed my views that the British re-presence in the West Indies and Turks and Caicos is based on greed, power and empire building. Now that the British are less concerned with trade in the West Indies they have shifted their focus to benefiting from foreign developers with enormous wealth. In this way the British have in a sense created an extortion relationship with the foreign investors of Turks and Caicos by forcing them to be shackled in punitive financial and legal obligations to the British government. In turn, this has opened the door for British developers who share a close political relationship with the British government. British developers are almost an extension of the British government enjoying multitudes of shared foreign contracts, subsidies and tax breaks; the British government can now profit from development in their own territories instead of handing over the spoils to foreign developers.
The final nail in the coffin is the new constitution in Turks and Caicos which will solidify Westminster's motives. I suspect that other British Overseas Territories are next on the list. Entities such as CARICOM were created to act as a proxy representative of the nations in the region. British Overseas Territories would be well advised to form a coalition either separately or with CARICOM to assist one another in these modern colonial times.
Thursday, May 19, 2011
British Government Sending Turks and Caicos Mixed Messages on Plans to Recolonize
Comment by: Anonymous
The British are saying two different things to us. They say they want us to be independent but aim to dash that dream by the new constitution that will give them more power than they have seen in 40 years in Turks and Caicos. They want to hold onto us and abuse us at the same time. Then you hear how much they would like to "unload" us but their actions say that they don't want to lose us. It is quite frightening to consider what they really want with us.
What the British have done to Turks and Caicos are the words and actions of brutal colonial masters. Yes, in 2011 it's time to open the debate again on the morality of colonialism. It is barbaric. Then again it is completely frustrating to have to reclose the door on colonialism in this day and age. It is the most basic right for a country of separate culture and people to have self determination, yet Turks and Caicos has regressed back to colonial days, nay ... back to slavery. We have lost our freedom, our treasury is now controlled by the UK and we are governed by (literally) a colonial dictator by the name of Gordon Wetherell. We will have to resign ourselves to the unfortunate reality that we will not get a straight answer and will need to forge ahead in the dark and hope for a light at the end of the tunnel.
(For information about the British presence in Turks and Caicos and constitution debate: http://www.fptci.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2527:public-rejects-reforms-proposed-by-advisors&catid=18:local&Itemid=26 )
The British are saying two different things to us. They say they want us to be independent but aim to dash that dream by the new constitution that will give them more power than they have seen in 40 years in Turks and Caicos. They want to hold onto us and abuse us at the same time. Then you hear how much they would like to "unload" us but their actions say that they don't want to lose us. It is quite frightening to consider what they really want with us.
What the British have done to Turks and Caicos are the words and actions of brutal colonial masters. Yes, in 2011 it's time to open the debate again on the morality of colonialism. It is barbaric. Then again it is completely frustrating to have to reclose the door on colonialism in this day and age. It is the most basic right for a country of separate culture and people to have self determination, yet Turks and Caicos has regressed back to colonial days, nay ... back to slavery. We have lost our freedom, our treasury is now controlled by the UK and we are governed by (literally) a colonial dictator by the name of Gordon Wetherell. We will have to resign ourselves to the unfortunate reality that we will not get a straight answer and will need to forge ahead in the dark and hope for a light at the end of the tunnel.
(For information about the British presence in Turks and Caicos and constitution debate: http://www.fptci.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2527:public-rejects-reforms-proposed-by-advisors&catid=18:local&Itemid=26 )
Turks and Caicos PDM Leader Doug Parnell Rejects New UK Constitution - Position Points
Doug Parnell, leader of the PDM political party in Turks and Caicos, rejects the UK constitution draft which the British plan to impose on the citizens without a vote. In addition, Clayton Greene, leader of the PNP political party in Turks and Caicos, also rejects the draft UK constitution. Mr. Greene has been vocal in his opposition to the new constitution being passed without a referendum, having written the FCO director Henry Bellingham stating as much. Both political parties representing the local government and citizens of Turks and Caicos have rejected the new UK constitution and its enactment.
Mr. Parnell sets out his unequivocal rejection of the new constitution and states point-by-point the reason for his rejection.
By Douglas Parnell
Leader, Peoples Democratic Movement
The Peoples Democratic Movement (PDM) rejects the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) draft constitution. Offered below are a number of reasons taken from our party’s position paper on the issue why it is unacceptable for our people and country at this stage of our development.
The 2010 review of the constitution of the Turks and Caicos Islands comes from an unfortunate period of maladministration and corruption exposed by a far reaching Commission of Inquiry requested by our party for the good of the country.
Peoples Democratic Movement leader Douglas Parnell
The findings of the Commission were shocking, and exposed numerous failings on the part of individuals in the last government, including individuals in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Governor. Ironically, while the Commission was in oral hearings, the Turks and Caicos Governor was still busy signing off on transactions where there was alleged corruption. The final report does not cite one constitutional failure as a cause for these alarming acts on the part of ministers.
It must be pointed out that this was not the first Commission of Inquiry to be requested. If former Governor Richard Tauwhare is to be believed, he declared at a Chamber of Commerce meeting in May 2008 that he had requested the FCO to call a commission of inquiry as far back as 2005. This was during a period before the 2006 constitution was enacted and in reality the Governor had greater authority and responsibility to act and correct failures of the local government at that time.
The FCO did not listen. What remains to be seen is whether the FCO will listen to the voice and wishes of the people to return our 2006 constitution or whether the FCO and its ministers will turn a deaf ear towards our concerns on OUR constitution.
As for the information in the Commission of Inquiry, the PDM stands resolute in our stance that “we told you so” and can safely say that we did what was right during this period of maladministration, unlike Governors Poston and Tauwhare, Meg Munn and Leigh Turner, who did what was wrong and ignored our concerns of corruption, and gross maladministration when they were brought forward and were summarily dismissed as lacking sufficient evidence.
The greatest obstacle to good governance and deterrent to sound financial management is a lack of hearing and adherence to the already existing laws of the Turks and Caicos Islands on the part of persons in authority. When this happens with locally elected officials, we have a remedy at the polls through a General Election, but when this happens with UK officials at the FCO the people of the territory have no recourse and we suffer for years, sometimes even decades.
Even today the FCO is not listening to their own MPs such as Andrew Rosindell and Lord Nigel Jones, who have both warned that a constitution cannot and should not be forced on the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands. Even to this day the FCO has neglected to pave a path for direct negotiations with the political parties on any change to the constitution as called for by our party and the British Parliament’s All Party Parliamentary Group on Turks and Caicos Islands, despite the precedent set during the 1986 suspension.
The FCO must remember that it has appointed over the years governors and attorneys general who have not served the interest of the people, but who served their own interest and broke the law.
The FCO cannot simply look at the last eight years and try to impose a constitution on the people based upon this period but it must look back and honestly assess its own failings, gross neglect and incompetence in administering its constitutional obligations to the Turks and Caicos people and our territory, obligations that is has agreed with the world to uphold and move towards. Yet, in this FCO draft constitution, the UK’s United Nations obligations are being disregarded. It is clear that the FCO is attempting to move the country backwards to an era of colonialism. It is seeking to extend temporary direct rule into permanent authority over the government of the Turks and Caicos Islands through its proposed draft constitution. This is unacceptable and we utterly reject it.
One of the measures being used to extend permanent authority over the Turks and Caicos people and their government is by granting greater authority to the governor under the pretext of correcting failures of the past. The governor would be granted the authority to:
a) reject the decision of cabinet,
b) make decisions contrary to cabinet; and
c) solely make appointments to public bodies.
Two cases come to mind that discredit this theory that granting greater constitutional power to governors will avoid corruption or conflicts of interest. Specific examples arise, namely, Attorney General Terrence Donnegan and Governor Christopher Turner. These two cases involved abuses of constitutional power. One was convicted and deported after the 1986 inquiry and the other left the territory in disgrace after granting special concessions to close relatives, which ended up costing the Turks and Caicos Islands people millions of dollars to correct. The FCO and the British Government did nothing to pay for their mistakes.
The people of the Turks and Caicos Islands cannot trust their constitutional destiny to a governor with unchecked power and authority over the three branches of government, the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. Our history has proven that governors can and will fail to act with integrity and honesty in their decision making powers. This draft FCO constitution also grants the governor unchecked power and authority over the institutions protecting the three branches of government making him a complete and total constitutional dictator.
We have been down this road before where the level of incompetence and corruption in government by locally elected officials, coupled with the incompetence and neglect at the FCO, has caused our country’s constitution to be temporarily suspended. We have equally been down the road where the imposed solutions to fix the equal failings of the locally elected government and the FCO robs the people of their democratic, constitutional and fundamental human rights. We wish not to go down that road again as proposed in this draft constitution.
In introducing the draft 2006 constitution for public consultation and debate, Lord Triesman remarked, “The UK has only retained those powers, including for the Governor, which are – and will remain -- necessary in TCI to ensure the implementation of international obligations; to protect itself against contingent liabilities; and to ensure good governance.” So what happened to the governor and his constitutional ability to ensure good governance? Again, it was not the people or the constitution that failed. It was the individuals the FCO appointed who failed in giving the necessary attention to the Turks and Caicos Islands. The FCO now seeks to cover up its failings and problems by imposing an untenable constitution on an unwilling people.
The fact is the FCO failed to uphold their responsibility for good governance, yet the people are being punished for it through a draft constitution that is regressive. This draft represents a major backward step for the people and the protection of their fundamental rights. Specifically, it has components that ignore the will of the people as expressed through their representatives in our Parliamentary system of democracy. This document would eliminate Parliament’s authority on specific matters. The message communicated is one of distrust and suspicion.
We can only conclude from the constitutional proposals that the FCO does not trust the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands to make sound decisions through their representatives and the mechanisms to make law because decisions can be overridden, limited and removed from Parliament’s ability to handle the country’s business. This is dangerous.
In exercising its remit in the Turks and Caicos Islands the FCO should be concentrating on fulfilling its commitment made to the rest of the world in the United Nations charter.
The UK will argue, wrongly, that it is not bound by International obligation, as former FCO minister under the Labour government, Lord Triesman, claimed in his speech to the Turks and Caicos Islands on April 24, 2006.
He said, “In this context, it might be helpful if I set out the UK position on alternative forms of relationship, some of which I know have been discussed here in TCI in recent weeks. UN General Assembly Resolution 1541 set out some options for the relationship between Administering Powers and Territories, including independence, integration and free association. The UK did not vote in favour of that resolution, and does not regard itself as bound by it”.
However, we are eager to point out to the FCO that not being bound to 1541 does not mean there isn’t still an obligation to Turks and Caicos Islands under the United Nations Charter. The text of Chapter XI of Article 73 paragraph A and B of the United Nations Charter, Declaration Regarding Non-Self-Governing Territories, reads, “Members of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories, and, to this end:
a. to ensure, with due respect for the culture of the peoples concerned, their political, economic, social, and educational advancement, their just treatment, and their protection against abuses;
b. to develop self-government, to take due account of the political aspirations of the peoples, and to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions, according to the particular circumstances of each territory and its peoples and their varying stages of advancement;
Clearly, if we are to hold the British Government to account for their role in helping the Turks and Caicos Islands and our people achieve any measure of advancement, the grade would be low. The fact is this exercise of constitutional change is counter and opposite to the obligations that the UK government has agreed to the world to uphold with regard to Turks and Caicos Islands. We reject it and will continue the work on drafting a constitution for the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands.
Mr. Parnell sets out his unequivocal rejection of the new constitution and states point-by-point the reason for his rejection.
By Douglas Parnell
Leader, Peoples Democratic Movement
The Peoples Democratic Movement (PDM) rejects the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) draft constitution. Offered below are a number of reasons taken from our party’s position paper on the issue why it is unacceptable for our people and country at this stage of our development.
The 2010 review of the constitution of the Turks and Caicos Islands comes from an unfortunate period of maladministration and corruption exposed by a far reaching Commission of Inquiry requested by our party for the good of the country.
Peoples Democratic Movement leader Douglas Parnell
The findings of the Commission were shocking, and exposed numerous failings on the part of individuals in the last government, including individuals in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Governor. Ironically, while the Commission was in oral hearings, the Turks and Caicos Governor was still busy signing off on transactions where there was alleged corruption. The final report does not cite one constitutional failure as a cause for these alarming acts on the part of ministers.
It must be pointed out that this was not the first Commission of Inquiry to be requested. If former Governor Richard Tauwhare is to be believed, he declared at a Chamber of Commerce meeting in May 2008 that he had requested the FCO to call a commission of inquiry as far back as 2005. This was during a period before the 2006 constitution was enacted and in reality the Governor had greater authority and responsibility to act and correct failures of the local government at that time.
The FCO did not listen. What remains to be seen is whether the FCO will listen to the voice and wishes of the people to return our 2006 constitution or whether the FCO and its ministers will turn a deaf ear towards our concerns on OUR constitution.
As for the information in the Commission of Inquiry, the PDM stands resolute in our stance that “we told you so” and can safely say that we did what was right during this period of maladministration, unlike Governors Poston and Tauwhare, Meg Munn and Leigh Turner, who did what was wrong and ignored our concerns of corruption, and gross maladministration when they were brought forward and were summarily dismissed as lacking sufficient evidence.
The greatest obstacle to good governance and deterrent to sound financial management is a lack of hearing and adherence to the already existing laws of the Turks and Caicos Islands on the part of persons in authority. When this happens with locally elected officials, we have a remedy at the polls through a General Election, but when this happens with UK officials at the FCO the people of the territory have no recourse and we suffer for years, sometimes even decades.
Even today the FCO is not listening to their own MPs such as Andrew Rosindell and Lord Nigel Jones, who have both warned that a constitution cannot and should not be forced on the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands. Even to this day the FCO has neglected to pave a path for direct negotiations with the political parties on any change to the constitution as called for by our party and the British Parliament’s All Party Parliamentary Group on Turks and Caicos Islands, despite the precedent set during the 1986 suspension.
The FCO must remember that it has appointed over the years governors and attorneys general who have not served the interest of the people, but who served their own interest and broke the law.
The FCO cannot simply look at the last eight years and try to impose a constitution on the people based upon this period but it must look back and honestly assess its own failings, gross neglect and incompetence in administering its constitutional obligations to the Turks and Caicos people and our territory, obligations that is has agreed with the world to uphold and move towards. Yet, in this FCO draft constitution, the UK’s United Nations obligations are being disregarded. It is clear that the FCO is attempting to move the country backwards to an era of colonialism. It is seeking to extend temporary direct rule into permanent authority over the government of the Turks and Caicos Islands through its proposed draft constitution. This is unacceptable and we utterly reject it.
One of the measures being used to extend permanent authority over the Turks and Caicos people and their government is by granting greater authority to the governor under the pretext of correcting failures of the past. The governor would be granted the authority to:
a) reject the decision of cabinet,
b) make decisions contrary to cabinet; and
c) solely make appointments to public bodies.
Two cases come to mind that discredit this theory that granting greater constitutional power to governors will avoid corruption or conflicts of interest. Specific examples arise, namely, Attorney General Terrence Donnegan and Governor Christopher Turner. These two cases involved abuses of constitutional power. One was convicted and deported after the 1986 inquiry and the other left the territory in disgrace after granting special concessions to close relatives, which ended up costing the Turks and Caicos Islands people millions of dollars to correct. The FCO and the British Government did nothing to pay for their mistakes.
The people of the Turks and Caicos Islands cannot trust their constitutional destiny to a governor with unchecked power and authority over the three branches of government, the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. Our history has proven that governors can and will fail to act with integrity and honesty in their decision making powers. This draft FCO constitution also grants the governor unchecked power and authority over the institutions protecting the three branches of government making him a complete and total constitutional dictator.
We have been down this road before where the level of incompetence and corruption in government by locally elected officials, coupled with the incompetence and neglect at the FCO, has caused our country’s constitution to be temporarily suspended. We have equally been down the road where the imposed solutions to fix the equal failings of the locally elected government and the FCO robs the people of their democratic, constitutional and fundamental human rights. We wish not to go down that road again as proposed in this draft constitution.
In introducing the draft 2006 constitution for public consultation and debate, Lord Triesman remarked, “The UK has only retained those powers, including for the Governor, which are – and will remain -- necessary in TCI to ensure the implementation of international obligations; to protect itself against contingent liabilities; and to ensure good governance.” So what happened to the governor and his constitutional ability to ensure good governance? Again, it was not the people or the constitution that failed. It was the individuals the FCO appointed who failed in giving the necessary attention to the Turks and Caicos Islands. The FCO now seeks to cover up its failings and problems by imposing an untenable constitution on an unwilling people.
The fact is the FCO failed to uphold their responsibility for good governance, yet the people are being punished for it through a draft constitution that is regressive. This draft represents a major backward step for the people and the protection of their fundamental rights. Specifically, it has components that ignore the will of the people as expressed through their representatives in our Parliamentary system of democracy. This document would eliminate Parliament’s authority on specific matters. The message communicated is one of distrust and suspicion.
We can only conclude from the constitutional proposals that the FCO does not trust the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands to make sound decisions through their representatives and the mechanisms to make law because decisions can be overridden, limited and removed from Parliament’s ability to handle the country’s business. This is dangerous.
In exercising its remit in the Turks and Caicos Islands the FCO should be concentrating on fulfilling its commitment made to the rest of the world in the United Nations charter.
The UK will argue, wrongly, that it is not bound by International obligation, as former FCO minister under the Labour government, Lord Triesman, claimed in his speech to the Turks and Caicos Islands on April 24, 2006.
He said, “In this context, it might be helpful if I set out the UK position on alternative forms of relationship, some of which I know have been discussed here in TCI in recent weeks. UN General Assembly Resolution 1541 set out some options for the relationship between Administering Powers and Territories, including independence, integration and free association. The UK did not vote in favour of that resolution, and does not regard itself as bound by it”.
However, we are eager to point out to the FCO that not being bound to 1541 does not mean there isn’t still an obligation to Turks and Caicos Islands under the United Nations Charter. The text of Chapter XI of Article 73 paragraph A and B of the United Nations Charter, Declaration Regarding Non-Self-Governing Territories, reads, “Members of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories, and, to this end:
a. to ensure, with due respect for the culture of the peoples concerned, their political, economic, social, and educational advancement, their just treatment, and their protection against abuses;
b. to develop self-government, to take due account of the political aspirations of the peoples, and to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions, according to the particular circumstances of each territory and its peoples and their varying stages of advancement;
Clearly, if we are to hold the British Government to account for their role in helping the Turks and Caicos Islands and our people achieve any measure of advancement, the grade would be low. The fact is this exercise of constitutional change is counter and opposite to the obligations that the UK government has agreed to the world to uphold with regard to Turks and Caicos Islands. We reject it and will continue the work on drafting a constitution for the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands.
Some Highlights of Turks and Caicos Town Hall Meeting for UK Draft Constitution
By: CC
Last night's town hall meeting for the new constitution had some defining moments. We should be proud of everyone who showed up even if they were there for support and not to speak.
I find it interesting that it was held in a church of worship and many believe that it was a strategy to keep us "God fearing" Belongers from fully stating our minds. Even Ian Hendry the UK moderator from the FCO made a remark about it being in a house of God so as to tell the truth. It was remarkable. Nobody is quite certain what the two ladies that flanked Mr. Hendry were there to do, they seemed to have no function.
The energy was palpable and the attendance was plentiful. Despite grumblings and gestures from those in the audience toward misstatements by Mr. Hendry, all attendees were polite and well behaved under the circumstances. There were also cheers and claps from attendees when several in the audience took to the mic to voice their concerns about the new constitution, although the mic had intermittent failures as well as poor audio and annoying feedback. We hope that this was coincidental.
Mr. Hendry looked annoyed at certain comments or corrections made by audience members as he tried to speak. It looked out of character for such a smooth operator whose technique with words was his strong asset. Mr. Hendry made several attempts to get the audience to work with the new constitution instead of rejecting it entirely. Although a couple of attendees vaguely agreed that some of the changes in the constitution looked okay, the majority in attendance rejected the new constitution in its entirety which was punctuate with a show of hands by a couple of the speakers. In fact Mr. Hendry tried to point out that the new provisions for nature conservancy is something we could agree on, to which someone in the audience called to his attention that it was used to cause the Chalk Sound Homeowners to lose their homes.
There were some other highlights from the audience speakers. There were some interesting points by our speakers:
1. That the FCO has a history of failing to work together with the citizens
2. The general feeling of pushed aside and disenfranchised
3. That Falkland is being given expensive border defence unlike Turks and Caicos, the only difference in the two OT's is skin colour
4. That the new constitution makes the assumption that the governor is alway superior over the citizens that are corruptible
5. That the new meeting was another way to waste Belongers' time because the FCO will not implement the changes
6. There was talk of intimidation, the special prosecutor passing around Michael Misick's wedding album identifying who was in attendance
7. There was a show of hands for the audience on who was in fear attending the meeting (most everyone's hands went up).
A crowd pleaser was Floyd Seymour's comment that he was in favour of the enquiry but he didn't realise that when the British were given the car to clean that they returned it with the transmission torn apart.
I think we got the better of them. Mr. Hendry looked frazzled as did Doreen Quelch Missick. All of the speakers were passionate and honest, but also polite I thought.
The most surprising speech was by Doug Parnell. We all know he has been working with the Interim government closely and flying to London to meet with Henry Bellingham. I almost fell out of my seat when he said that this document (the new constitution) would force us to sever our relationship with the UK and move toward independence. He said it was a deal breaker and he would take it as a sign to drive us away.
Last night's town hall meeting for the new constitution had some defining moments. We should be proud of everyone who showed up even if they were there for support and not to speak.
I find it interesting that it was held in a church of worship and many believe that it was a strategy to keep us "God fearing" Belongers from fully stating our minds. Even Ian Hendry the UK moderator from the FCO made a remark about it being in a house of God so as to tell the truth. It was remarkable. Nobody is quite certain what the two ladies that flanked Mr. Hendry were there to do, they seemed to have no function.
The energy was palpable and the attendance was plentiful. Despite grumblings and gestures from those in the audience toward misstatements by Mr. Hendry, all attendees were polite and well behaved under the circumstances. There were also cheers and claps from attendees when several in the audience took to the mic to voice their concerns about the new constitution, although the mic had intermittent failures as well as poor audio and annoying feedback. We hope that this was coincidental.
Mr. Hendry looked annoyed at certain comments or corrections made by audience members as he tried to speak. It looked out of character for such a smooth operator whose technique with words was his strong asset. Mr. Hendry made several attempts to get the audience to work with the new constitution instead of rejecting it entirely. Although a couple of attendees vaguely agreed that some of the changes in the constitution looked okay, the majority in attendance rejected the new constitution in its entirety which was punctuate with a show of hands by a couple of the speakers. In fact Mr. Hendry tried to point out that the new provisions for nature conservancy is something we could agree on, to which someone in the audience called to his attention that it was used to cause the Chalk Sound Homeowners to lose their homes.
There were some other highlights from the audience speakers. There were some interesting points by our speakers:
1. That the FCO has a history of failing to work together with the citizens
2. The general feeling of pushed aside and disenfranchised
3. That Falkland is being given expensive border defence unlike Turks and Caicos, the only difference in the two OT's is skin colour
4. That the new constitution makes the assumption that the governor is alway superior over the citizens that are corruptible
5. That the new meeting was another way to waste Belongers' time because the FCO will not implement the changes
6. There was talk of intimidation, the special prosecutor passing around Michael Misick's wedding album identifying who was in attendance
7. There was a show of hands for the audience on who was in fear attending the meeting (most everyone's hands went up).
A crowd pleaser was Floyd Seymour's comment that he was in favour of the enquiry but he didn't realise that when the British were given the car to clean that they returned it with the transmission torn apart.
I think we got the better of them. Mr. Hendry looked frazzled as did Doreen Quelch Missick. All of the speakers were passionate and honest, but also polite I thought.
The most surprising speech was by Doug Parnell. We all know he has been working with the Interim government closely and flying to London to meet with Henry Bellingham. I almost fell out of my seat when he said that this document (the new constitution) would force us to sever our relationship with the UK and move toward independence. He said it was a deal breaker and he would take it as a sign to drive us away.
We All Reject the New UK Constitution in Turks and Caicos
By: Proud Islander
The headline that I wrote sums it up. We sat there in the house of God as beckoned by the UK Foreign Commonwealth Office. They called us to a holy sanctuary thinking they would deter us from speaking our minds. But God intervened and allowed us to speak our hearts. The British thought that they could play on our fears by bringing us to the church when we could have assembled at a public auditorium.
The pride from my heart turned to overwhelming joy when I witnessed each of our speakers bare his and her souls. We cried out to be heard of the wrongs that we endure with high taxes, high cost of living, no jobs, the heartache of the jeopardy that we face with the new British rule and now a constitution to solidify their occupation. We cried out for us. Not for them. We know that our cries were falling on deaf ears but we did it any way for us to have our say out loud in front of God and our country.
We said no to the bigoted Ian Hendry another white man from England sent to school us and put us in our place. He said that the British call all the shots. You could hear a gasp from all of us at once.
The British try to get us to agree to this or that thing in their constitution draft but we said no, we won't be agreeing to nothing in that document because we reject it. Minor issues are not the debate because we disagree with the draft constitution entirely. The British had trouble understanding, we won't focus on small points in it. Who drafted the constitution? Not us.
Our men dressed real nice and spoke well. We showed the FCO representatives that we have many educated, smart and capable leaders in Turks and Caicos. The church was filled with capable leaders and Ian Hendry can take that back to England because that's a fact. We don't need the likes of the British white men thinking they are superior to us just because of the colour of their skin. Their skin colour does not make them more qualified to run our country when we have good, educated individuals that care about our futures and our country.
We will not play games with their constitution changes anymore. They want us to work with it and we say no. If it were a real constitution it would be made by the people, for the people and voted on by the people. They cannot swoop in to draft a new constitution of their own liking and give their own governor authority over our government at his will and trick us into agreeing to it without a vote setting us back 30 years and taking away our self determination. Ian Hendry can take that back to England too.
There is not a chance that these constitutional lawyers believe in their honest moments that what they are doing is legally or ethically right. They know they are doing dirty work. I call upon Mr. Hendry and his side kicks to withdraw from their duties of wrong doing. No constitutional lawyer with any scruples would advise a people to accept any constitution without a vote and certainly not this one. I can't get over how they are trying to trick us. The FCO are slippery serpents, as is Ian Hendry. Take that back to England now sir.
The headline that I wrote sums it up. We sat there in the house of God as beckoned by the UK Foreign Commonwealth Office. They called us to a holy sanctuary thinking they would deter us from speaking our minds. But God intervened and allowed us to speak our hearts. The British thought that they could play on our fears by bringing us to the church when we could have assembled at a public auditorium.
The pride from my heart turned to overwhelming joy when I witnessed each of our speakers bare his and her souls. We cried out to be heard of the wrongs that we endure with high taxes, high cost of living, no jobs, the heartache of the jeopardy that we face with the new British rule and now a constitution to solidify their occupation. We cried out for us. Not for them. We know that our cries were falling on deaf ears but we did it any way for us to have our say out loud in front of God and our country.
We said no to the bigoted Ian Hendry another white man from England sent to school us and put us in our place. He said that the British call all the shots. You could hear a gasp from all of us at once.
The British try to get us to agree to this or that thing in their constitution draft but we said no, we won't be agreeing to nothing in that document because we reject it. Minor issues are not the debate because we disagree with the draft constitution entirely. The British had trouble understanding, we won't focus on small points in it. Who drafted the constitution? Not us.
Our men dressed real nice and spoke well. We showed the FCO representatives that we have many educated, smart and capable leaders in Turks and Caicos. The church was filled with capable leaders and Ian Hendry can take that back to England because that's a fact. We don't need the likes of the British white men thinking they are superior to us just because of the colour of their skin. Their skin colour does not make them more qualified to run our country when we have good, educated individuals that care about our futures and our country.
We will not play games with their constitution changes anymore. They want us to work with it and we say no. If it were a real constitution it would be made by the people, for the people and voted on by the people. They cannot swoop in to draft a new constitution of their own liking and give their own governor authority over our government at his will and trick us into agreeing to it without a vote setting us back 30 years and taking away our self determination. Ian Hendry can take that back to England too.
There is not a chance that these constitutional lawyers believe in their honest moments that what they are doing is legally or ethically right. They know they are doing dirty work. I call upon Mr. Hendry and his side kicks to withdraw from their duties of wrong doing. No constitutional lawyer with any scruples would advise a people to accept any constitution without a vote and certainly not this one. I can't get over how they are trying to trick us. The FCO are slippery serpents, as is Ian Hendry. Take that back to England now sir.
Turks and Caicos United Again, We are a Nation
By: BF
Turks and Caicos is small, hearsay travels fast. That boded well for the British when they tried to divide us in their recolonization aggression over the last 2 years. But now it is working in our favour. If it hadn't been for the draft constitution meetings we would not have been able to compare notes together to see how united we have become. I see hope that we have overcome the British brainwashing. The meetings this week are precisely what we needed. I thank Mrs. Sharlene Cartwright Robinson for encouraging us to unite as a nation to speak for our convictions at the town hall meetings. I also thank the FCO's Mr. Ian Hendry for inadvertently uniting us by trying to force sell the British draft constitution on TCI. Look at what we discovered about us. Our values are similar. Our ideas are just. Our principles are sound. We uniformly oppose the overreaching policies set in motion by the British. We discovered that we have many educated leaders that care about the future of Turks and Caicos. The intellect exhibited by many of our speakers in the meeting venues exemplified what we have been doing right as a nation all of these years with empowerment programs and education scholarships. We are not ignorant natives, as the British hoped.
It is impossible for the British to dispute that we are a separate nation when they witnessed that our values and ideas as a nation clearly do not align with the policies that the British seek to impose on us as a populace. We, the people, reject the British draft constitution. Both the PDM and the PNP political parties reject the British draft constitution. The draft constitution meetings clearly demonstrated how passionately different we feel from the British on the whole. We are Turks and Caicos "the nation" not the colony. It is as plain as the nose on their face and ours. The British are trying to force a square peg into a round hole. They have gone to great cost to recolonize us. They want it badly. They have stopped at nothing to humiliate us, threaten us, keep information from us and democratically oppress us. But again, look at what we discovered about us, we are the same people at the end of the day. When push came to shove we all united for the good of our nation and we reaffirmed our congruent values. We care about the future of our nation.
When confronted with a political tragedy like ours, nobody knows how a person will respond. We were confronted with losing our jobs and businesses by the British, and some of us did. We were confronted with losing our freedoms, literally with threats of crimes over all of us. We were confronted with losing our homes, and some of us did. I will not pretend that we all did the right thing along the way while we were plagued in an emergency situation. Somebody artificially activated the malicious finger pointing campaign around these parts, it worked yesterday but not today and not tomorrow. Look at what we discovered about us, we are the same people at the end of the day.
This has been a gratifying week. Clayton Greene and Doug Parnell came through for us and showed us that we (as people and as a nation) were more important to them than party politics. We were present for each other from every island and every political affiliation to help for a common cause. Do you know what that means? It means that we are "we" and not "them" and it means that we are not and cannot be a part of the British. We do not share any similarities to them; their policies are opposite of our values. When people don't see eye to eye it's time to go their separate ways, not join as the British are forcing.
We discovered that we are a nation of strong convictions and values and nobody can take that from us at the end of the day and nobody can take "us" from us. We can stick together and unite. I am proud of our leaders once again and am proud to be a Turks and Caicos Islander.
(originally published at http://tcipost.com/wordpress)
Turks and Caicos is small, hearsay travels fast. That boded well for the British when they tried to divide us in their recolonization aggression over the last 2 years. But now it is working in our favour. If it hadn't been for the draft constitution meetings we would not have been able to compare notes together to see how united we have become. I see hope that we have overcome the British brainwashing. The meetings this week are precisely what we needed. I thank Mrs. Sharlene Cartwright Robinson for encouraging us to unite as a nation to speak for our convictions at the town hall meetings. I also thank the FCO's Mr. Ian Hendry for inadvertently uniting us by trying to force sell the British draft constitution on TCI. Look at what we discovered about us. Our values are similar. Our ideas are just. Our principles are sound. We uniformly oppose the overreaching policies set in motion by the British. We discovered that we have many educated leaders that care about the future of Turks and Caicos. The intellect exhibited by many of our speakers in the meeting venues exemplified what we have been doing right as a nation all of these years with empowerment programs and education scholarships. We are not ignorant natives, as the British hoped.
It is impossible for the British to dispute that we are a separate nation when they witnessed that our values and ideas as a nation clearly do not align with the policies that the British seek to impose on us as a populace. We, the people, reject the British draft constitution. Both the PDM and the PNP political parties reject the British draft constitution. The draft constitution meetings clearly demonstrated how passionately different we feel from the British on the whole. We are Turks and Caicos "the nation" not the colony. It is as plain as the nose on their face and ours. The British are trying to force a square peg into a round hole. They have gone to great cost to recolonize us. They want it badly. They have stopped at nothing to humiliate us, threaten us, keep information from us and democratically oppress us. But again, look at what we discovered about us, we are the same people at the end of the day. When push came to shove we all united for the good of our nation and we reaffirmed our congruent values. We care about the future of our nation.
When confronted with a political tragedy like ours, nobody knows how a person will respond. We were confronted with losing our jobs and businesses by the British, and some of us did. We were confronted with losing our freedoms, literally with threats of crimes over all of us. We were confronted with losing our homes, and some of us did. I will not pretend that we all did the right thing along the way while we were plagued in an emergency situation. Somebody artificially activated the malicious finger pointing campaign around these parts, it worked yesterday but not today and not tomorrow. Look at what we discovered about us, we are the same people at the end of the day.
This has been a gratifying week. Clayton Greene and Doug Parnell came through for us and showed us that we (as people and as a nation) were more important to them than party politics. We were present for each other from every island and every political affiliation to help for a common cause. Do you know what that means? It means that we are "we" and not "them" and it means that we are not and cannot be a part of the British. We do not share any similarities to them; their policies are opposite of our values. When people don't see eye to eye it's time to go their separate ways, not join as the British are forcing.
We discovered that we are a nation of strong convictions and values and nobody can take that from us at the end of the day and nobody can take "us" from us. We can stick together and unite. I am proud of our leaders once again and am proud to be a Turks and Caicos Islander.
(originally published at http://tcipost.com/wordpress)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)