For the Claim of Sovereign Allegiance

Submitted by nineofnine

……… do swear that I will be faithful and bare true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth 2, Her Heirs and Successors, according to law, so help me GOD.

I ……… being appointed Minister do swear that I will, to the best of my judgement, at all times, when so required, freely give my counsel and advice to the Governor General, or any other person for the time being, lawfully performing the functions of that office for the good management of the public affairs of Barbados and I do further swear, that I will not, on any account, at any time whatsoever, disclose the counsel, advice, opinion or vote of any particular Minister or Parliamentary Secretary, and that I will not, except with the authority of the Cabinet and to such extent as may be required, for the good management of the affairs of Barbados, directly or indirectly reveal the business or proceedings of the Cabinet, or nature or contents of any documents communicated to me as Minister or any matter coming to my knowledge in my capacity as such and that in all things, I will be a true and faithful Minister, so help me GOD.



As I sat, listened and observed the duly elected members of the newly appointed Government taking their OATHS OF OFFICE, it dawned on me a peculiarity of the oath’s content.

Three declarations were made by each member, the first, declaring allegiance, repeated twice and the third, pertaining to Ministerial Office.

As a citizen of Barbados and to my knowledge, INDEPENDENCE was declared in 1966 when the Union Jack was lowered and the National Flag of Barbados was raised as well as the official signing of Documents.

Having said that, it is of great concern and which requires an explanation to understand why, in the swearing in of duly elected members of the Cabinet, swear allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, and not to the Constitution of Barbados, after 50 years of Independence.

In the recently held elections (2018), concern and grievance was raised when Commonwealth citizens were being denied by the Electoral and Boundaries Commission (EBC) to vote. The EBC stood ground. The case traversed the Law courts and eventually docked at the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) which made a final judgement in favor of the Commonwealth citizens under threat to the EBC.

The Questions are…

-Why did the EBC stood ground?
-Was it a question of legality to vote?
-Is entitlement to vote, clearly defined in the regulations governing the EBC?
-Why did the CCJ upheld the legality of the Commonwealth Citizens’ right to vote?
-Did they base their judgement on the written Constitution?
-Should the Constitution be amended to favor Sovereignty?
-Are definitions conflicting?

Suffice to say, these events should have raised some strong concerns or point to Principle Considerations. It speaks to positions, that is, of the roll of the British Monarchy vs the Sovereignty of a Nations’ Independence. Is it unclear at this juncture? Should ANY lines be drawn?

We are aware that those territories still under the Union Jack are entitled to DUAL citizenship as well as a VOTE within the Commonwealth as long as they have met the requirements to vote as a CITIZEN…. BUT when a TERRITORY renounces the Commonwealth, the Sovereignty of the Nations’ Constitution becomes the adjutant of itself.

If the Constitution stills reflects the component of British subjection and omits Sovereign rights, then a civil discourse of minds must engage this rather peculiar situation to make clear the definitive principle.

85 comments

  • So she was there!!!

    Thank God I was wrong!!

    Has she made her decision?

    Like

  • NorthernObserver

    No decision yet, the dice are still a tumbling…”of the roll of the British Monarchy”

    Like

  • Nineofnine,

    Grow up and stop writing crap. Go and have a hot drink.

    Like

  • Well Well & Cut N' Paste At Your Service

    This is were FOIA will play a roll in all this 60 year old secrecy and hiding information from the people who elected ministers and PAY THEIR SALARIES….the new ministers actually swearing to keep information from the public…no es bueno…

    “It was encouraging to say the least, to hear Prime Minister Mia Mottley’s open promise to reporters immediately following her swearing in last Friday that as soon as new integrity legislation is fully enacted, the next item on the legislative agenda of her new Government will be passage of the long awaited Freedom of Information Act (FIA).”

    FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT….

    I don’t know which is worse at this point, new ministers, swearing and vowing to keep information from the very population who mere hours before elected them and who over the course of the 5 or 10 year term have to pay every minister, senator etc their salaries every month while information about the people’s business is kept from the people throughout their terms in parliament….I did not make that up.

    ….OR…..

    Pledging allegiance to a monarchy that still does not recognize the basic human rights of black Caribbean people, their right to dual citizenship for those born under the colonies pre independence or their right to exist without being oppressed and terrorized by a british government…

    …..and not let’s forget that this same monarchical beast…fully expect to extend those clear insults and disrespect to Caribbean people….right down the line of her progeny for centuries to come ., so that no generation of Caribbean people or their heirs and descendants ever have allegiance pledged to them, by their own black leaders….her progeny and heirs and her descendants are entitled to that allegiance and the black population’s heirs and descendants right to allegiance from their leaders is stolen for centuries into the future…. in this spell of white magic…. which must be broken…

    I don’t know about anyone else…but I clearly see the evil intent…

    The reparations movement should take note that seeking reparations is not about collecting billions of dollars….that too is a grave insult to African ancestors and their living descendants……reparations is about righting wrongs and freeing the black race from their modern day bondage and invisible neck irons , leg irons and chains, still extending outward all the way from that beast in buckingham palace.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Well Well & Cut N' Paste At Your Service

    Hal…your brainwash is unattractive and insults the intelligence of current and future generations of Caribbean black people who have to live under this monarchic bondage generation after generation..

    .. your bondage in UK is and was of another kind, which of course being blinded for decades, you are still unable to see,

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    @nineofnine, one assumes you submitted the piece in order to vent and blow off steam (hot air) because it truly does nothing much more.

    What is the point at this mature stage of information overload to write such an inquiry of gobbylgock? ..let Google be your knowledge guide!

    The question of swearing allegiance to the Queen is a valid one for any progressive thinker who seeks clear answers on the worth of the title of independence but any such progressive who is rational can also appreciate that realistically for any Bajan such ‘sworn allegiance’ is a verbal appeal only that is grounded in tenets of law only…

    Our allegiance is to our nation Barbados: I pledge allegiance to my country Barbados and my flag, to uphold and defend her honour and by my living to do credit to my nation wherever I go”

    Excuse me for errors or omissions but I ran that from memory …in short that’s ALWAYS been it for ME.. I have no affiliation to the Queen and never felt any. I would feel and act exactly the same even if I were situated as any of those being sworn before the GG.

    That said; just recently there was a report that a retired teacher ‘marked up’ a letter from the US president (most surely written by someone in his office tho) and basically graded it poorly in all areas like substance etc. It was reported she said that it “would barely have received a passing grade if a high schooler had written it”.

    I am not a teacher but respectfully this piece brings out the same sentiment from me….

    ‘Suffice to say, these events should have raised some strong concerns or point to Principle Considerations. It speaks to positions, that is, of the roll of the British Monarchy vs the Sovereignty of a Nations’ Independence. Is it unclear at this juncture? Should ANY lines be drawn?
    (Unclear to whom and about what??)

    “…BUT when a TERRITORY renounces the Commonwealth, the Sovereignty of the Nations’ Constitution becomes the adjutant of itself.”
    (Say what now. Which country ‘renounced’ the Commonwealth? How does that actually happen…some sort of ComExit? What does the CW have to do with our constitution?)

    “If the Constitution stills reflects the component of British subjection and omits Sovereign rights, then a civil discourse of minds must engage this rather peculiar situation to make clear the definitive principle.” (Cor blimey, old chap what nettle of stale fish n chips is that?)

    Like

  • Well Well & Cut N' Paste At Your Service

    The arrogance that dwells within this monarchy is as follows…they fully expect Caribbean people to continue to accept the UK created reality of the unaware populations being subservient for centuries into the future….because their over the decades has told them and they are well aware that not one brainwashed leader would question their own subjugation..

    .what freaking nerve….and a distinct disgrace that Caribbean leaders appear oblivious to all of this, or they would open a discourse on the subject in the spirit of educating their own people to the existence of this 52 year old blight in their lives and the lives of their heirs and descendants….instead they continue to walk to the guillotine…willingly ….and take their people right along with them..

    Pacha…ah hope ya reading this.

    Like

  • WW you can be such a short sighted twat,this is your chance to get out of the hole. Harry and megan, william and kate will be the new show and your govt should be enticing them to barbados for the commercial spin off . I am very happy they are coming to banff but you need the exposure more. Get your hate out of the argument and try and see if the island can make a resurgence

    Like

  • Well Well & Cut N' Paste At Your Service

    because their INTELLIGENCE over the decades has told them and they are well aware that not one brainwashed leader would question their own subjugation..

    Like

  • Well Well & Cut N' Paste At Your Service

    Lawson…shut up, no one needs a monarchy to sell the island worldwide…wuh ya think social media and the internet is for…ya just trying to keep the evil shit alive so ya can crawl into Barbados every year and pretend ya superior to the majority population while slithering into strip clubs every night trying to turn the whole island into prostitutes.

    The brits want the monarchy gone…they are of no value and are even more useless to Caribbean people…which part of that is evading you..

    I am sure youngsters like Harry et al would themselves like to be free of the whole shitshow….it is as plain as day on their faces..

    .ya belong in a museum, just like the monarchy.

    Like

  • Well Well & Cut N' Paste At Your Service

    Lawson…ya think ah didn’t know what..

    What kate and this one and that one what..

    The internet is the new monarchy in town, no one wants to see a bunch of frumpy people….with a blighted, cursed history trailing along behind them.

    Like

  • So early in the morning goodness man! Someone writes an opinion and persons do not attack the ideas in a civil and respectful way but immediately they start name calling and firing personal insulting remarks directed at the writer. Sigh.

    Like

  • Well Well & Cut N' Paste At Your Service

    Ah guess ya also missed the election…where over 100,000 people in the majority population….voted into government…a political party, whom they will pay a salary to every month for 5 or more years, to reinvent the island so that there is a resurgence of interest and business and a strong economy to match.

    …that is their jobs…they were the ones elected, not a monarchy, if they want to be dumb enough to rely on a dying monarchy to do their jobs for them just because they were misled over the decades into pledging allegiance to them, like the stripped government obviously did…then they too deserve to be stripped by the electorate and brutally so.

    BTW..hate is not a part of me, I dont give anyone that power over me to hate them, dislike or distaste is a milder, more accurate word, less personal.

    Like

  • Well Well & Cut N' Paste At Your Service

    I just skipped right over Pedant’s post because I needed clarity of thought and found it too early to fill my head with nonsense…as the blogmaster keeps suggesting…the scroll button works just fine.

    Like

  • they figure up to two billion watched the wedding just a little spin off could dramatically help the island known as little england. saety sun sand and sea along with alittle royal enticing could give a uptick to tourism rather than sewage seaweed and spite

    Like

  • @T.Inniss

    Agree with you. Some of need to take a breath and leave room for others to comment.

    Like

  • @Dee Word

    Is it true to say until Barbados move to a Republican system swearing allegiance to the Queen is par for the course?

    Liked by 1 person

  • Well Well & Cut N' Paste At Your Service

    Lawson…there is no spite involved…you get resistance when people dont like the truth….

    you are projecting an image that the island’s leaders to not have the mental capabilities to make the island successful without the stamp of a monarchy..

    ..well commonsense tells me if the monarchy has been in their lives for 52 years post independence and they are not successful or developed yet….there is very little chance of that happening in another 52 years….if the leaders do not shift their allegiance to the people and actually do some work.

    If success and wealth and development has not happened in 52 years of blind loyalty to a monarcy…when will.. it happen?

    You have all the answers, so tell me.

    Like

  • Double take
    As per the Constitution.

    …” And Whereas as early as 18th February, 1651 those inhabitants, in their determination to safeguard the freedom, safety and well-being of the Island, declared, through their Governor, Lords of the Council and members of the Assembly, their independence of the Commonwealth of England”….

    The English COLONISTS declared their Independence from the Commonwealth of England 18th Feb.1651 after they formed a Parliament in 1639.

    IN 1966 a rehash of Independence was instituted from whom… The COLONISTS. REINFORCING a split from the Commonwealth.

    Think on that for a moment.

    Like

  • Georgie Porgie

    @ T InnisMay 30, 2018 6:18 AM

    So early in the morning goodness man! Someone writes an opinion and persons do not attack the ideas in a civil and respectful way but immediately they start name calling and firing personal insulting remarks directed at the writer. Sigh.

    SIR . THIS IS THE NORM ON BU.
    IT IS CALLED CHALLENGING
    MORONS WHO KNOW NOTHING ABOUT A SUBJECT WILL WRITE A LOAD OF BOVINE EXCREMENT THEREON.

    BARE MOCK SPORT IN THE RUM SHOP I CALL IT
    IT IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY MANY WHO USED TO FOLLOW BU HAVE QUIT…AND WHY MANY WHO WERE INVITED RECOIL AND RUN IN HASTE AFTER INITIAL VISIT

    Like

  • Gee GP…at least answer the question for Lawson, I am always willing to learn from someone else, even if it is something I don’t want to hear….I am holding Lawson to this question and will look at him differently if he is unable to answer.

    So there was this person I know, angry with this particular prominent, well renowned family, for decades beating up on the family in the media…and one day they did a genetic profile and found out that they were of the same bloodline, that is why I carry no spite or hate or anything else for any family, no matter how evil, I learned from that persons years of error…plus there is the vomit factor…lol

    Like

  • @ de pedantic Dribbler May 30, 2018 5:33 AM

    Base on your assumption and that is what it is.
    What steam?
    Google WHAT? Will the same Google affirm Planet X or extraterrestial life or Chemtrailing?

    note… “HE THAT IS IN YOU IS GREATER THAN HE THAT IS IN THE WORLD”..

    You point allegiance to our nation Barbados: I pledge allegiance to my country Barbados and my flag, to uphold and defend her honour and by my living to do credit to my nation wherever I go”

    Yep, stand at attention all citizens of the land, salute the flag, but the LEADERS PLEDGES THEIR ALLEGIANCE TO THE QUEEN.

    You don’t see anything wrong with that do you? The English Colonist did.
    Any grading on your part should be that of the parameters which is the construct of Governance.

    At this juncture you also agree that clarity is required. This is not sport or mockery.
    I for one need to determine what is happening around me at all times so as to make the best decisions.

    Stay away from chips.

    Like

  • It is very difficult to understand the basis of the criticisms being made of @nineofnine’s contribution. The facts of the situation are as the writer describes them and insults, or the use of disrespectful language do not change that. It is an absolute fact that sovereignty in the constitution is not vested in the people of Barbados but in the Crown in Parliament which is part Britain’s constitutional monarchical system, on which is based the political system of representative democracy. The constitution of Barbados makes this absolutely clear. This constitutional arrangement reflects the fact that in the 52 years of independence, in a country where over 95% of the population are descended from the enslaved Africans, we have been and still are operating under a system that was put in place by the English slavemasters to dehumanise, torture and exploit our foreparents. If the purpose of discussion is to build collective understanding and find solutions to problems, rather than name calling, disrespecting and insulting each other, it makes no sense to deny facts that are easily proved.

    Like

  • Bernard Codrington

    Allegiance to the Queen is just symbolism to allay the fears of the citizens ,who believe the queen has power and would exercise it. We Christians have crosses in our churches but we do not worship crosses.

    Every minister knows that it is ritual which means that he will act in the interest of the true sovereign i.e the people who elected him. The Head of State symbolizes the people. That is the reason that she can ignore the PM who appointed her and do what is in accordance with the constitution. The constitution is her guide. I am sure HM the Queen would have given the GG that piece of advice.

    So we must ignore the pomp and circumstance and ask “what are we really doing? What is the import of what we are doing? And Why?”

    Do you really think we would have gotten the support of certain sections ( rich and poor)of the Barbados society in 1966 if there was not a conspiracy to lure them into a sense of security?

    Head is not brain and brain is not wisdom.

    Like

  • They will still deny those facts…that is how sheep are programmed to assimilate, they do not want to hear stark truth, digest or disassemble the information that will free their minds…although all the proof is available to them……. and remain quite comfortable in their mentally challenged state, thank you very much..

    …. even getting to this stage was and is of itself a major battle…they were an experiment, a project which was very popular from the 1600 and even up until the 1900s…but don’t tell them that, not many want to hear that reality.

    Then they are those who have no intention of seeing Caribbean people free from the yoke of the empire…they do not see that as being in their own best interest least they have no one to pretend to be superior to and denigrate when they are bored…Africans have taken matters in their own hands for that reason alone, they are trying to be free and there is a movement to stop them, so they are striking out very violently at the objects of their torment, terror and harassment..

    It is not easy reversing brain damage, I never expected it to be easy and neither should you…I was just happy Africans have reached the stage of understanding they are supposed to be free of any level of bondage directed at them and their future generations.

    Like

  • Bernard Codrington

    I do understand the feelings and concerns of those who find it uncomfortable to hear their ministers swearing allegiance to HM the Queen. It is our framers of the constitution who thought it was politic to do so. If the citizens are now mature enough to reframe the oaths , now is the time to do so. But we need to agree.

    Like

  • Bernard…I thought long and hard about my answer, but here it is:

    It has been 52 years…so what is the current excuse….. yes that is a question.

    Like

  • Bernard Codrington

    I wonder what changes it would take for Well Well to show respect for Barbadians? I believe she is a product of Machine Intelligence. I working on an algorithm for Well Well and when I discover where she resides I am going to reprogram her.LOL

    Liked by 1 person

  • 9 0f 9
    re note… “HE THAT IS IN YOU IS GREATER THAN HE THAT IS IN THE WORLD”..
    what you talking bout here? what does this mean? You are misquoting and misappropriating a verse from 1 John 4:4 who is speaking specifically to believers.

    This is like your ignorant rant on the RAPTURE, ah lie?

    remember this YOU MUST NOT TAKE A TEXT OUT OF CONTEXT FOR THEN YOU MAKE IT A PRETEXT!

    Liked by 1 person

  • lol…very funny…

    Bernard, you know sometimes Bajans just need a gentle nudge, not too hard a push.

    Besides..I am crushed, after all that pride I showed for the St. John people and the population as a collective on election night, you dare to embarrass me…I do not give away pride freely, as a matter of fact, I give away nothing freely…it has to be earned.

    So ya know someone is going to have to work real hard to earn my respect.

    And ya so neatly danced around the question that ya nearly made me forget.

    So what will it be, another 52 years of being mediocre, subjugated pretend leaders who see no need to pledge allegiance to their own people …or…. will the females have to take over, show real balls and make the necessary changes…your choice.

    Like

  • @Bernard

    Appreciate your perspective and agree to a point. What is your position on the use of symbolism, imagery and allegories in how we order our lifes?

    Like

  • @T.Inniss

    Give them a chance to implement, less than a week on the job?

    Like

  • Bernard Codrington May 30, 2018 9:48 AM

    Bobbing and weaving,
    the PM selects the GG and at the same time the GG can ignore the same PM and answer to the Monarch via the Constitution.

    Tell me then, that the Constitution is the highest instrument of the land, and as you put it , the queen would have advised the GG to always refer to the Constitution..

    Hence… Why then the Rituals (of allegiance).. as you put it?

    …”Do you really think we would have gotten the support of certain sections ( rich and poor)of the Barbados society in 1966 if there was not a conspiracy to lure them into a sense of security?..

    WOW… By your own admission, a conspiracy by deception for support, of the people.

    …”It is our framers of the constitution who thought it was politic to do so. If the citizens are now mature enough to reframe the oaths , now is the time to do so. But we need to agree”.

    AGREE.

    Like

  • Tee White…knowing this crowd as I do and in those days, even today, they were still so enamoured with that blighted monarchy and knowing the brits as I do, ah got enough brits relatives, both black and white and in between and….

    ….and knowing that buckingham palace is well aware that they have those who can still today claim british citizenship born in the Caribbean…they all entered into some arrangement, the details of which none of them will want to reveal to the very people Bernard is now confessing they all deceived…since most of those who entered into their deal and dance with the devil are long deceased anyway, and UK will not give up that information easily.

    They are still tied somehow to their masters or they would have long ago severed those ties, I will tell you why…

    Fruendolittle ran up to the UK a couple years ago and told the UK media….he said not one word to the people on the island as usual, that he was making the island a republic…whatever he saw when he actually tried to and lazy as he was I know he saw something…stopped him in his tracks.

    The same can be said for Owen who was so hot to break whatever bond they got with UK…but suddenly one day went real cold on the idea…just like his best friend pre election…Fruendel

    It is worthwhile investigating how they tangled up themselves so thoroughly back then and are so reluctant to untie and sever today.

    Don’t they disgust you that they still tell the people nothing that happened back in 1966….what mess they tangled up the people’s lives and future generations in.

    Like

  • Ya see…they still pledge to keep secrets from their people and that allegiance they still pledge dictates they keep their mouths shut about what they did in 1966, there is nothing good behind any of that.

    So when like Owen and Fruendel they get these wild hairs in their tails to go republic…something their predecessors did is causing a problem to untie and turning them instantly cold to the idea.

    Like

  • For Thinkers

                           · Do twins ever realize that one of them was unplanned?
    

    . What if my dog only brings back my ball because he thinks I like throwing it?

    · If poison expires, is it more poisonous or is it no longer poisonous?

    · Which letter is silent in the word “Scent,” the S or the C?

    · Why is the letter W, in English, called double U? Shouldn’t it be called double V?

    · Maybe oxygen is slowly killing you and it just takes 75-100 years to fully work.

    · Every time you clean something, you just make something else dirty.

    The word “swims” upside-down is still “swims”.

    · Intentionally losing a game of rock, paper, and scissors is just as hard as trying to win.

    · 100 years ago everyone owned a horse and only the rich had cars. Today everyone has cars and only the rich own horses.

    · Your future self is watching you right now through memories.

    · If you replace “W” with “T” in “What, Where and When”, you get the answer to each of them.

    · Many animals probably need glasses, but nobody knows it.

    · If you rip a hole in a net, there are actually fewer holes in it than there were before.

    · If 2/2/22 falls on a Tuesday, we’ll just call it “2’s Day”. (It does fall on a Tuesday)

    · 100 years ago a Twenty Dollar bill and a Twenty Dollar gold piece were interchangeable. Either one would buy a new suit, new shoes and a night on the town. The Twenty Dollar gold piece will still do that.

    Like

  • Tee White May 30, 2018 9:26 AM

    Not many are on the same page, nor see its relevance.

    It is an absolute fact that sovereignty in the constitution is not vested in the people of Barbados but in the Crown in Parliament which is part Britain’s constitutional monarchical system, on which is based the political system of representative democracy. The constitution of Barbados makes this absolutely clear.

    T, The country are two tiers beyond renouncing the Monarchy, why are we still here? Even distractors play their roll in the game.
    Something is being protected.

    Like

  • ….. all that is kept in the dark must be revealed to the light.

    Do you see now why none of dem x2 political parties could ever be trusted, not a one..not as long as they continue to pledge that allegiance and take that oath of secrecy to their UK masters…until that day that they. no longer have that constitutional/colonial yoke around their necks, I would never trust any of them who cross through those parliament doors.

    There are now many political parties trying to get their turn…the electorate must be very, very vigilant.

    Like

  • The Barbados Independence Act 1966 (c. 37) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that granted independence to Barbados with effect from 30 November 1966. The Act also provided for the granting of a new constitution to take effect upon independence, which was done by the Barbados Independence Order 1966.

    Who were the persons constituted to produce the Constitution via the Barbados Independence Order 1966?..

    Like

  • moving the constitution to the bush experiment…https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvwFCJ8qHN8

    Like

  • I bet none of them will say what the Bush experiment was as it related to the Constitution….., of course Smith has been gone a few years now and would not tell you even if he could…he knew who his head of state was after independence…still is…and that was whom he pledged allegiance to….and made his secret oath to.

    Like

  • Bernard Codrington

    @ David at 11 :28 AM

    Symbols,Imagery, and allegories form an important part of communication between humans. We use them everyday to express emotions, to describe things for which we cannot find words and to inspire and motivate persons to action.

    Our national anthem is replete with these terms. Just take some time and meditate on the lyrics. Are the statements literally true? No. But philosophically they are because we want or believe they are. Deception is only deception when we do not want to be deceived. Barbados is both a physical fact and an ideology.It is that ideology that Well Well is trying to destroy.

    Like

  • Bernard…lol..what are you blaming me for this time..

    yall got up in ya little Lala land of fantasy for 52 years…allowed yaselves to be tricked and decieved from 1966…enjoyed every damn second of it..and want to blame me now that reality as finally put in an appearance…really..ha

    It is yall gotta explain to this generation and the next why ya allowed it to happen…am not the one have to do it…I am quite happy to stay on the sidelines and watch…with glee..lol

    How come none of you knew ideologies are always someone else’s fantasies…AND EXPERIMENT..

    Like

  • @Bernard

    Understand your view.

    Like

  • Bernard Codrington

    @ Nine of Nine

    Continue your research. You are doing quite well. You have come on BU to learn. I cannot teach you anything at this stage of your life. I too am learning. The education system is really in need of a revamp. I learned today that it is a blessing that some people do not vote.

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    @Bernard, there you are again in your role as a ‘diplomat’: “Continue your research. You are doing quite well. […] I cannot teach you anything at this stage of your life.The education system is really in need of a revamp. I learned today that it is a blessing that some people do not vote.”

    If I didn’t know better I would say you are being razor sharp sarcastic…but nah!

    ROFLMHO.

    Liked by 1 person

  • I do however understand the dynamics that would have been in play in 1966, because John Compton had an episode of being held on a british battleship when he tried to educate his people in St. Lucia, however, there is no excuse now, in these times and with the UN being a big part of playing watch dog and with ALL of us now knowing about those 30 Articles of Universal Human Rights declared in 1948, no such criminality can be practiced by UK….wiithout consequences.

    So again…what is the excuse for living in dreamland in 2018….as “educated” leaders of islands.

    I mean if people still want to be subjugated, it’s a choice, not everyone thinks that low of themselves..but do not take a whole population along for the ride.

    Any destruction, yall are responsible…not me Bernard..lol.

    Like

  • The best advice I can give yall…do like these teenagers of African descent and find your roots, if you do not know where you are from, you cannot know where you are going..

    Like

  • Wow…. the amount of ‘wasted’ intelligent rhetoric on this topic is amazing. If the contributors do similar to important problems facing our island then we can solve all our problems….. but please keep the name-calling & personal insults out of the discussions.

    Liked by 1 person

  • ks…did you have a valid contribution to make or are you just looking for attention..

    ….this link has been free since last night…at 8:35pm ..last post, it’s 9:16am another day…and I noticed not one fella contributed anything, I can guess why, but I much prefer watch.

    Like

  • ww
    Expect that…
    DNA is playing a pivotal roll in the advancement of the human, call it evolution of the psyche or by any other name that connotes the inner man. True that it helps to know your ancestry, but what is unfolding in nefarious domains of intelligence gathering leaves one to think twice before submitting to DNA testing.

    Look what is happening next door in Trinidad.. forcing the civil service to mandatory submit their DNA to a collection body.
    But WHY?… Its A VIOLATION OF RIGHTS to begin with, its personal property. Ask yourselves why does this effort to create a database containing personal info on you and your ancestry go beyond the stockholders…. NOT GOOD.

    Like

  • Nine…they are going to get it any way, they will find a way, my experience with how certain bodies operate tells me you can’t escape it, one way or the other they will get your genetic profile via ya blood, whether ya dead or alive, they will take it..

    ..we are better off utilizing the existing availability of the tests to know from whence we came and let them knock themselves out trying to create a bunch of fiction in their heads, they have still learned nothing about the fantasy of world dominance and the blowback that is possible……lol

    BTW…look at this..

    “(5) No person shall be compelled to take any oath which is contrary to his religion or belief or to take any oath in a manner which is contrary to his religion or belief’.”

    I am wondering if the ministers ever read the constitution and what are their beliefs…..if they have any beliefs outside of getting rich…

    Reading the constitution makes for a hell of an eye opener, given it particularly states that it was drafted in the british parliament, which makes the monarchic hold over them total…making it especially difficult to untie given that all persons born in Barbados and the Caribbean pre independence ARE british citizens, subjects and protected persons…still, today…that is part of the tangled web.

    The only caveats to the constitution are the pretty recent changes by the local Barbados government, which by the way belongs to the UK complete with ministers and GG…

    told cal something was very wrong with that set up…..my daughter was explaining the whole rigmarole to me…so let’s see what I can come up with during the course of reading.

    Like

  • Told yall something was very wrong with that set up.

    Like

  • The FIRST CONTRACT in renouncing the Commonwealth of England was establish by the Governor of the day, one lord Willoughby and commissioners representative of the Commonwealth of England via the Charter of Barbados (Feb 1651), built on the tenets of Christianity.(not sanctioned )

    A British naval fleet of seven ships arrived from England in October 1651 and set up a blockade of Barbados. Battles between the English forces and Willoughby’s militias took the lives of several hundred Barbadian men. Facing certain defeat against the imperial navy, Lord Willoughby surrendered on January 17, 1652.

    The SECOND CONTRACT in renouncing the Commonwealth of England was established on the declaration of Independence, reinforcing the Sovereignty of Barbados as a Nation. (sanctioned)

    Like

  • The Constitution already provides for a Freedom of Information Act, that these 2 bit PMs and ministers from both political parties refused to legislate it for years.

    “Except with his own consent, no person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his freedom of expression, and for the purposes of this section the said freedom includes the freedom to hold ideas and freedom to communicate ideas without interference, freedom to information without interference, freedom and from interference with his correspondence or other means of communication..”

    Like

  • Nine …..but then they went to the british parliament and rolled back the whole thing when drafting the constitution, I thought it would have started on a Barbados’ sovereignity note, but it did not..

    Like

  • WW
    So it seems, but somewhere I came across info suggesting there was “a revision ” of sorts done to coincide with Independence 1966,

    Like

  • Nine… I will get it and post it to you cause it’s such a conversation piece, but am currently on page 27 and that is on the very first page of the constitution…well get back there in a while…

    this section clearly shows where Fruendel was clearly trying to get the CCJ to break the law in the Myrie case..

    “22. (1) No person shall be deprived of his freedom of move- ment, that is- to say, the right to move freely throughout Barbados, the right to reside in any part of Barbados, the right to enter Barbados, the right to leave Barbados and immunity from expulsion from Barbados.

    (2) Any restriction on a person’s freedom of movement that is involved in his lawful detention shall not be held to be inconsistent with or in contravention of this section.”

    Like

  • And what really broke his back, grandstanding that the CCJ gotta go…joker, he would have to amend the constitution to gt rid go the CCJ..lol

    “(4) Where any question is referred to the High Court in pursuance of subsection (3), the High Court shall give its decision upon the question and the court in which the question arose shall dispose of the case in accordance with that decision or, if that decision is the subject of an appeal under this Constitution to the Court of Appeal or to the Caribbean Court of Justice, in accordance with the decision of the Court of Appeal or, as the case may be, of the Caribbean Court of Justice.”

    Like

  • To get rid of the CCJ..

    Like

  • Powers of the GG..

    ” (2) Subsection (1) shall not apply to the functions conferred upon the Governor-General by the following provisions of this Constitution, that is to say-

    (a) section 66(2) (which requires the Governor-General to revoke the appointment of the Prime Minister in certain circumstances) ;

    (6) the proviso to section 61(2) (which requires the Governor- General to dissolve Parliament in certain circumstances) ; and

    (c) section 84(4) (which requires the Governor-General to remove a Judge from office in certain circumstances).

    (3) Where the Governor-General is directed to exercise any function on the recommendation of any person or authority , he shall exercise that function in accordance with such rec- ommendation :

    Provided that-
    (a) before he acts in accordance therewith, he may, in his discretion, once refer that recommendation back for reconsideration by the person or authority concerned; and…”

    Like

  • FYI…composition of parliament

    ” Composition of Parliament
    35. There shall be a Parliament of Barbados which shall consist of Her Majesty, a Senate and a House of Assembly.”

    Like

  • Bernard Codrington

    Wuh Loss. The students doing well today. Proff. Cumberbatch will be pleased. I too glad for them.

    Like

  • Sunshine Sunny Shine

    Stuppppse

    And you got the nerve to tell someone that they write dribble. Mottley is Prime Minister and George Payne is accused of some serious charges against his name and you decided that in your wisdom it is best to write a shite piece about allegiance.

    Like

  • WW..
    Maybe Her Majesty wasn’t included in the contract of 1651, hence the Imperial Navy.
    Sleepy Smith described the then Governor and the representation of the day. That alone was enough to form the third party.

    What does the constitution speak to amends?

    Like

  • Nine..ah got a couple pages still to go and I will post the relevant constitutional law…

    but it is instructive to note that under law which is solely tied to british parliament, they cannot get out from pledging this allegiance to the crown..

    “59. No member of either House shall take part in the proceedings thereof unless he has taken the oath of allegiance in such manner as is prescribed by any law in force in Barbados.”

    Like

  • Very instructive…

    (1) The executive authority of Barbados is vested in Her Majesty .

    (2) Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the executive authority of Barbados may be exercised on behalf of Her Majesty by the Governor-General either directly or through officers subordinate to him.

    (3) Nothing in this section shall prevent Parliament from conferring functions on persons or authorities other than the Governor-General.

    Like

  • What is even more disturbing is, the governors general over the last 2 decades have not really being doing their jobs because they are appointed based on party affiliation which is counterproductive seeing as the GG can fire the PM, they have managed to turn it all assbackwards and allowed the ministers, PMs etc to run wild on the island..I hope Mason don’t sully her decades of service by allowing this government to act as wild as the last government..

    Anyway…prepared to be shocked…Nine…cause the soverignity offered, appears to be a fickle fantasy and very fleeting given what I posted before…I expected to see more about the island being sovereign in it’s own right in the document…all I saw was how much the ministers and GG were owned by UK…if ya leaders are owned by another country you are not sovereign, you exist at their whims and fancy, besides, they allow them to run wild on the island and will only rein in everything if another country threatens to thief the island..lol

    THE CONSTITUTION OF BARBADOS
    Whereas the love of free institutions and of independence has always strongly characterised the inhabitants of Barbados:

    And Whereas the Governor and the said inhabitants settled a Parliament in the year 1639:
    And Whereas as early as 18th February, 1651 those inhabitants, in their determination to safe guard the freedom,safety and well-being of theIsland,declared, through their Governor,Lords of the Council and members of the Assembly, their independence of the Commonwealth of England:

    And Whereas the rights and privileges of the said inhabitants were confirmed by articles of agreement, commonly known as the Charter of Barbados, had, made and concluded on 11th January, 1652 by and between the Commissioners of the Right Honourable the Lord Willoughby of Parham, Governor, of the one part, and the Commissioners on behalf of the Commonwealth of England, of the other part, in order to the rendition to the Commonwealth of England of the said Island of Barbados:

    And Whereas with the broadening down of freedom the people of Barbados have ever since then not only successfully resisted any attempt to impugn or diminish those rights and privileges so confirmed, but have consistently enlarged and extended them:
    Now, therefore, the people of Barbados
    (a) proclaim that they are a sovereign nation founded upon principles that acknowledge the supremacy of God, the dignity of the human person, their unshakeable faith in fundamental human rights and freedoms and the position of the family in a society of free men and free institutions;
    1 Section 10 of Act 1990-17 has been incorporated as section 9 of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act, Cap. 117A.
    THE LAWS OF BARBADOS
    Printed by the Government Printer, Bay Street, St. Michael by the authority of the Government of Barbados
    1974-34. 1980-52. 1981-24. 1985/50. 1989-16. 1990-17.1 1992-18. 1995-2. 2000-18. 2002-14. 2002-15. 2003-10. 2005-9. 2007-10. 2007-42.

    ss.1-2
    The Constitution of Barbados L.R.O. 2007 8
    (b) affirm their belief that men and institutions remain free only when freedom is founded upon respect for moral and spiritual values and the rule of law;

    (c) declare their intention to establish and maintain a society in which all persons may, to the full extent of their capacity, play a due part in the institutions of the national life;

    (d) resolve that the operation of the economic system shall promote the general welfare by the equitable distribution of the material resources of the community, by the human conditions under which all men shall labour and by the undeviating recognition of ability, integrity and merit;

    (e) desire that the following provisions shall have effect as the Constitution of Barbados—
    CHAPTER I THE CONSTITUTION

    This Constitution is the supreme law of Barbados and, subject to the provisions of this Constitution, if any other law is inconsistent with this Constitution, this Constitution shall prevail and the other law shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be void.

    CHAPTER II CITIZENSHIP
    2. (1) Every person who, having been born in Barbados, is on 29th November, 1966 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies shall become a citizen of Barbados on 30th November, 1966.
    (2) Every person who, having been born outside Barbados, is on 29th November, 1966 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies shall, if his father becomes or would but for his death have become a citizen of Barbados in accordance with the provisions of subsection (1), become a citizen of Barbados on 30th November, 1966.
    Constitution is supreme law.
    Persons who become citizens on 30th November, 1966.

    9 L.R.O. 2002 The Constitution of Barbados
    (3) Any person who on 29th November 1966 is a citizen of the
    United Kingdom and Colonies,
    (a) having become such a citizen under the British Nationality Act 19481 by virtue of his having been naturalised in Barbados as a British subject before that Act came into force; or
    (b) having become such a citizen by virtue of his having been naturalised or registered in Barbados under that Act,
    shall become a citizen of Barbados on 30th November 1966.
    3. (1) Any woman who on 29th November is or has been married to a person—

    Like

  • Nine..that’s it for the day, I have to digest the information, there are 59 pages in my head, you will be getting my post soon..

    Like

  • Though nitwits of confounded ineptitude, demons of the sorts with an agenda,rise to debase this discourse, do so out of darkness. Many are enlightened, I’m sure and will put malice to rest base on the facts presented. IGNORE!

    Many political arguments will be put to rest, though established, there is room for improvement going forward, a tweaking if you may.

    As per the determination of Citizenship, the Constitution determines a seven year period in one instance and a ten year minimum in another… How did the EBC arrived at a three year period of residency to be determined a citizen in order to vote?.. unless there was an amendment or stealth directive issued…certainly it is not noted in THIS “VERSION ” of the Constitution.

    Like

  • WW. …
    Your efforts are appreciated, for delivery of the facts. A valued contribution, indeed.

    Like

  • You are welcome Nine…there are still at least 65 pages to read, until we fully understand the constitution, we will not know what they are still hiding from us, the upside is.. the Barbados constitution is a hell of a lot easier and friendlier to read than the US constitution…that one is no picnic.

    One thing is for sure, there is a reason why that lot have refused to assert their rights to be sovereign, my daughter feels there is some benefit they get for not being a republic, that might be one reason, but to me it is too easy.

    If you do not own your own parliament, your own ministers whose salaries you pay along with the GGs salary who can also be paid from the Consolidated Fund…exactly what does the people have to call their own in that arrangement…..so the people are mere voters and the various slaves owned by the crown, paid by the people…are just goddamn puppets…no wonder they do nothing to benefit the majority population..

    Like

  • SSS
    [video src="https://media.giphy.com/media/xUOxeQn7933BauvKg0/giphy.mp4" /]

    Like

  • @Well, Well 4:39pm
    Spot on. This idea that the rituals and symbols used in the swearing in of MPs and ministers is just symbolism and pomp and circumstance but in fact the people are the real sovereign power is a mistaken one resulting from a misunderstanding of the nature of governmental power within the British system of constitutional monarchy.

    In this system, supreme power is vested in the Crown in Parliament and not in the people. Therefore with regard to governance, the decision making power comes from the royal prerogative of the Crown which is exercised by the Prime Minister, the cabinet and the Governor General and from the laws passed in parliament. The people’s voice is absent. They cannot instruct their so-called representatives to vote in any particular way, they have no power to initiate legislation and they have no power to recall even a representative they are unhappy with, let alone dismiss a government until the Primie Minister, using their royal prerogative powers, calls a new election. Once they leave the ballot box, their decision making power within this system is spent. This is why governments can do what they like and the people can’t do anything to stop them. Even the oath to keep things secret from the people is evidence that the people are not sovereign. Have you ever had a job in which part of your work responsibilities was to keep secrets from your boss? In fact, in most cases doing just that would get you fired.

    It is true that the people of Barbados, like workers and poor people all over the world, have imposed universal adult suffrage onto this system through their sacrifices and struggles. However, it is also clear that this has not been enough to end the people’s marginalisation in the governance of the country.

    As Bajans, we need new constitutional arrangements which sweep away the sovereignty of the Crown in Parliament, vest sovereignty in the people of Barbados and create the constitutional mechanisms that allow us to be the decision makers in our country.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ Tee White

    …”As Bajans, we need new constitutional arrangements which sweep away the sovereignty of the Crown in Parliament, vest sovereignty in the people of Barbados and create the constitutional mechanisms that allow us to be the decision makers in our country”….

    EXACTLY,

    A momentous cause, visionary and a creation for Legacy, sets the precedence for others still in the mix. Its real liberty. from the ties than bind and you have those who would think its bribble or nonsense even to raise the issue.

    Like

  • Well Well & Cut N' Paste At Your Service

    Tee White…that’s the plan, hence my call for this very unique and quite unexpected but totally timely opportunity to be used to reform the Constitution. .

    ..the PM and GG have those powers…to amend the constitution….unless she is warned by her UK masters not to, which will tell us who is what cause they dont normally interfere in the day to day management of the country and the question will immediately arise about why the people/electorate cannot have the power to recall ministers and whole governments since:

    A) no GG has ever fired a prime minister or ministers in 52 years no matter the accusations against them, it is always left to the electorate to replace governments, so why should the people not have the power to remove and recall governments during their terms…..through referendum…

    Oh…it will be interesting to watch.

    Like

  • Well Well & Cut N' Paste At Your Service

    Surprised it is not named the Royal Supreme Court of Judicature

    “82. (1) If the office of Chief Justice is vacant or if the holder
    thereof is performing the functions of the office of Governor-General
    or is for any other reason unable to perform the functions of his office,
    then, until a person has been appointed to that office and assumed its
    functions or, as the case may be, until the holder thereof has resumed
    those functions, they shall be performed by such other person,
    qualified under section 81(2) for appointment as a Judge, as the
    Governor-General, acting on the recommendation of the Prime
    Minister, may appoint to act as Chief Justice by instrument under the
    Public Seal.”

    Like

  • Well Well & Cut N' Paste At Your Service

    Fruendel had to be removed, he is way too deceitful, the CCJ is even responsible for the removal of Supreme Court Judges if the process warrants it…

    “(4) A Judge shall be removed from office by the Governor-
    General, by instrument under the Public Seal, if the question of the
    removal of that Judge from office has, at the request of the Governor-
    General made in pursuance of subsection (5), been referred by him to
    the Caribbean Court of Justice and the Court has advised the
    Governor-General that the Judge ought to be removed from office for
    inability as aforesaid or for misbehaviour.”

    Like

  • It is horrendous the findings thus far of the former Administration “works”. It appears that the delay to call the elections was buying time to tie off loose ends and cement a “Deep State” within the Government construct, to call upon and promote their “philosophy”, but nah, the doors were closed in the faces and left outside. Homeless, they will be desperate from fear, running to and fro, not even the rocks going hide them.

    Future proves past

    Like

  • Well Well & Cut N' Paste At Your Service

    Lol…that secret society of the local privy council wants disbanding, they have created a deep state in bajan style, I can just imagine how they managed to twist everything into corrupt knocks to such an extent that they can no longer even recognize themselves…let alone recognizing and accepting the laws and decisions from their own supreme court and CCJ judges.

    Many of them should be in prison for what they have done..

    Like

  • knots

    Like

  • It depends…
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/14/canadian-swear-allegiance-queen-oath-hereditary
    …Unsurprisingly, I’m not the only immigrant to Canada to feel this way. Michael McAteer, Simone Topey and Dror Bar-Natan have been fighting a legal battle to obtain citizenship without the oath. McAteer and Bar-Natan have political objections like mine, and Topey, a Rastafarian, has religious objections…

    Like

Join in the discussion, you never know how expressing your view may make a difference.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s