est. 2007

Barbados Underground

Bringing News and Opinions to the People

, ,

Caswell Franklyn Speaks – Constitution or no Constitution?

For some time I have been hearing a person on social media proclaiming that Barbados does not have a constitution. Normally, I would listen in amusement and take it for the comic relief that it provided but now it is no longer funny. It has potential to become dangerous and reckless as I am now…

Submitted by Head of Unity Workers Union, Caswell Franklyn

For some time I have been hearing a person on social media proclaiming that Barbados does not have a constitution. Normally, I would listen in amusement and take it for the comic relief that it provided but now it is no longer funny. It has potential to become dangerous and reckless as I am now hearing others expressing disrespect for the court system because they are also parroting the nonsense about this country not having a constitution. I am concerned that Government has not attempted to clarify the situation and has allowed this dangerous nonsense to take root.

In September 2021, Government brought a bill to Parliament entitled:

An Act to alter the Constitution in order

(a) to provide for Barbados to become a republic with a President who shall be Head of State of Barbados; and

(b) to provide for related matters.

It might have slipped pass many but one of the related matters was legislating, for the first in the Barbados Parliament, a constitution for this country. The original independence constitution of Barbados was never passed in our parliament, it was merely a schedule to an order in council, the Barbados Independence Order, made by Queen Elizabeth II.

When Government decided to rush headlong into republican status; it did so without doing any adequate preparatory work. In order to meet the deadline of November 30, 2021, Government took its usual shortcuts approach by obtaining parliamentary approval, without first consulting the people of this country. On September 29, 2021 the Constitution (Amendment) (No.2) Bill, 2021 was passed in the House of Assembly, and it passed the Senate on October 6, 2021, with only one dissenting vote.

The 1966 Barbados Constitution was a schedule to the Barbados Independence Order, made by Queen Elizabeth II. That order was revoked by subsection 4.(1) of Constitution (Amendment)(No.2) Act. Without more the Constitution would also have been revoked but that subsection went on to save the Constitution. For clarity, section 4 of the Constitution (Amendment)(No.2) Act states:

4.(1) The Independence Order is revoked; but the revocation of that Order shall not affect the validity of the Constitution set out in the Schedule to that Order.

(2) The Constitution referred to in subsection (1) shall be altered in accordance with the provisions of section 49 thereof in the manner and to the extent set out in this Act; and on the appointed day the Constitution so altered shall become the Constitution and supreme law of Barbados.

Admittedly, Government’s approach, to legislate the Constitution for the new republic of Barbados, was mediocre at best or even shameful but it was means to an end. It does not reflect the pride of which Barbadians boast but it is what it is; we do have a constitution.

146 responses to “Caswell Franklyn Speaks – Constitution or no Constitution?”

  1. Yolande Grant - African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved. Avatar
    Yolande Grant – African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved.

    Pacha…your thoughts on the Caribbean region ditching the greenback to trade in local currencies.

  2. The Peoples Democratic Congress (PDC) Avatar
    The Peoples Democratic Congress (PDC)

    .
    Our attention was brought by significant another to the above lead post that was written by one Caswell Franklyn..

    We have gone through the missive thoroughly and we have NOT been surprised by its vacuity…

    It carries no intellectual weight whatsoever….

    A 13 year old could easily have been mistaken to have written it..

    It is essentially a simplistic regurgitation of what originally came out of the then BLP led parliament…. during the so-called debate in both Chambers of the Parliament of the said Constitution Amendment No 2 Act 2021…

    In the lead post above, Caswell Franklyn is yet another public figure who has gone and has produced a hatchet job in his attempt to reverse (to whatever extent) the growing public consciousness and ferment in Barbados over the fact that there is NO LONGER a Barbados Constitution, and also in his attempt at stifling (to whatever extent) the accompanying growing public alarm and distress over the utter and serious constitutional mayhem, disorder and breakdown taking place in Barbados as a consequence of the destruction of the constitutional affairs of Barbados by this ILLEGAL BLP regime…..

    He joins Ronnie Yearwood who also recently failed to help reverse growing public alarm over the subversion usurpation by this said ILLEGAL, UNCONSTITUTIONAL regime of the proper legal constitutional functioning of all public institutions in this country.

    Unfortunately the horse has long bolted from the stable..

    So, just as Yearwood has failed MASSIVELY to do so, so will Franklyn fail MASSIVELY to do so…

    Franklyn’s feeble wishy washy has GIGANTICALLY failed to or omitted to deal with a number of serious and fundamental facts…which are as follows…

    1) That on the 11 of October 2021, there was the promulgation and entering into operation of Section 14 of the said Constitution Amendment No 2 Act 202, by the then Governor General Sandra Mason, on the instruction of this having become ILLEGAL, UNCONSTITUTIONAL, ILLEGITIMATE BLP regime….The remainder of the Act was NEVER promulgated nor was it entered into force nor was it capable thereafter of becoming the law of Barbados given the following facts….That with the promulgation and entering into force of Section 14 there was the INVALIDATION of the Barbados Independence Act 1966 and the REVOCATION of the Barbados Independence Order 1966…Such have arisen because of the application of the constitutional doctrine of implied repeal of statutes laws, wherefore a proper understanding and application by persons generally of the doctrine involves later statutes laws being bound to repeal earlier statutes laws – wherefore there is conflict between them on the same subject matter and their scopes – in the case of Barbados the subject matter having been the head of government of Barbados, the process by which the person holding such a position acceded to it, etc…The fact that Section 14 referred to the outlining of the office of President of the government – the holder of such an office being head of government of Barbados – meant that by virtue of the coming into force of said Section 14, the UK monarch was no longer head of government of Barbados…Hence, the BLP regime having realized its intention of severing all remaining constitutional ties with the UK monarch….saw the cessation of the UK monarch as head of government of Barbados and the cessation of the office of Governor General…So whereas the UK monarch was imposed on the Barbadian people as head of government of this country, the office of President was for a short while an elected one….Section 14 took precedence over the entire Barbados Independence Order 1966….which not only was used to indicate the relevant British sovereigns giving of legal effect to the Constitution (see S 3 of the Order) but was also used to indicate the setting out of the former Constitution in the Schedule to the Order…

    The 1966 Order and Section 14 therefore conflicted…Whereas, this having become ILLEGAL, UNCONSTITUTIONAL and ILLEGITIMATE BLP regime had control over the coming into force of Section 14, it has had NO CONTROL WHATSOEVER over the application of the doctrine to such circumstances where both the Barbados Independence Act 1966 and the Barbados Independence Order 1966 and the Section 14 could NEVER EVER co-exist in law in this country…and wherefore one set of laws had to take precedence over the other…And so with the REVOCATION of the Order and thus the Constitution of Barbados having gone through the eddoes as well, the remainder of the Act became TOTALLY nullified as there was NO Constitution to which the remainder of the Act and eventually Section 14 of the said Act, had applied..

    2) The last legal Parliament did NOT have the legal and constitutional power, right or authority to give legal effect to the Constitution, upon, or not, the Revocation of the 1966 Order…In Section 49.5 of the former Constitution, the Parliament only had the RIGHT to revoke, to amend or to suspend the then Constitution…Parliament did NOT have a constitutional POWER, RIGHT or AUTHORITY to give effect to the former Constitution upon, or not, the REVOCATION of the 1966 Order…..Furthermore, it was legally impossible for the Parliament of Barbados to give effect to a document that already had been given legal effect and that was inseperably tied to the UK monarch and other sovereigns…. The giving of legal effect to the Barbados Constitution was alone done by the relevant British sovereigns…The 1966 Order was the instrument that was used – and that could only have been the one and only instrument so used – to indicate the giving of legal effect to the Constitution evidence of such…..An Amendment to the former Constitution could NEVER EVER have amounted to such a necessary instrumentation upon which the Constitution was capable of having been continued with….Such a necessary instrumentation must not only be capable of having been referenced to by persons but must also be capable of having to SET OUT the full Constitution – as was the case of the Barbados Independence Order with the Barbados Constitution…..

    3) There was NO legal constitutional basis upon which the former Constitution could have been continued with/was continued with, upon the revocation of the 1966 Order…. as that, no such bases could have been/were identified in law…..The Schedule of the former Barbados Independence Order 1966 was only capable of having been used to SET OUT for the understanding of many others what – in truth and in fact – were the detailed provisions so making up the Constitution, and that were themselves subject to the interpretation of many others….based on whatever interpretation rules where required……The Schedule to an Order, Act is NOT a law itself….although it is part of any law that was used to create it…..The Schedule was a point of reference albeit a very important one…Still, a Schedule CANNOT be made to stand on its own without its parent…..Worse, it cannot be given a foster parent..Hence, the Schedule to the 1966 Order, was NEVER and could NEVER have been tied to the Constitution Amendment No 2 Act 2021…..simply because it does not belong there….Hence, the Schedule to 1966 Order, and hence the Constitution COULD NEVER HAVE STOOD ON ITS OWN, as is seen immediately below….

    4) The former Barbados Constitution did NOT stand on its OWN…….meaning that the former Constitution of Barbados was not made without sources of power or authority to give it effect and to continue to do so….in accordance with the law…Therefore the question of whether the former Constitution could have stood on its own is not one strictly of physical seperateness – as between the Order and the Schedule (with the Constitution set out there in) as suggested some commenters on the matter of the question but one of whether the Constitution had its own validity through indication by a legal sovereign authority…The logic is that were the Constitution to have had its validity there would have been no need for the BLP regime to state that notwithstanding the revocation of the Order, how the validity of the Constitution as set forth in the Schedule to the Order was not affected by such a revocation…The wording would have been entirely different enough to suggest that by the Constitution having been standing on its own, the Order was simply revoked…

    Anyhow to return to the point about the Constitution having NEVER stood on its own, it was clear that consistent with an argument, alterations to it could NOT have been made without reference to the Barbados Independence Order 1966 and or reference to any other law too that indicated authority from the UK Sovereign and or the GG to have altered it. The Constitution received its validity from the British Parliament and the UK monarch..and as such the validity of the Constutition was expressed ONLY through the Barbados Independence Order 1966 from 1966 to October 11, 2021..For, no where in the former Constitution was it stated that it was given effect by the UK monarch….or the legal method upon which it was given validity…Indeed, again, the validity of the former Constitution was inseperably tied to the UK monarch…Moreover, Section 26 of the former Constitution (saving clause) also proves that it (the former Constitution) did NOT stand on its own, by virtue of the said section having been made to impliedly refer back to the said Barbados Independence Order 1966 that indicated the saving of all unrepealed laws from 1964 and onwards up to 2021….The Constitution was a set of British laws that was based on that order…Once the ILLEGAL UNCONSTITUTIONAL BLP regime had decided to do away with the UK monarch – thus the revocation of the Order – and upon the then GG having signed off on the promulgation of Section 14 of the Constitution Amendment No 2 Act 2021, saw the final major act of the then GG – and
    most destructive as well, having been there and then the Constitution having no longer had any validity and its no longer existing in law…
    .

    5) Further to 4, the Barbados people, following the British legal political tradition, have had three sources of law….Customs, Common/Case Law, Statute… For laws to be valid they must fall within any of the 3 really the last..Statute law…Hence in further, properly localizing British legal standards to Barbados, the relevant British authorìties made the former Constitution take the form of being part of subsidiary legislation (Order in Council)…With the revocation of the Order, the former constitution was not capable therefore of coming under any other law (namely statute); added to the fact that it was not capable of being continued with beyond the authority of the UK monarchy, constitutionally legally….Indeed, that it was not supported by or based on legislation or statute has meant it is NO longer EXISTS in fact…Furthermore, there was no law passed by the Barbados Parliament upon which the former Barbados Constitution could have rested (did rest), meant that going forward, unless the Constitution had become rested on and based upon some law passed by the Barbados Parliament, it could NEVER EVER exist/did not exist in law, as all laws for Barbados had, in their natures and effects, to take the form of – had to be either customary law, common/case law or statutory law….

    6) From an international law perspective, where various treaties and conventions have met with the involvement of many governments of various international bodies or councils, it has been established by those same governments that in order for the relevant provisions of some of those treaties and conventions to take legal effect in the particular countries of the governments concerned, the relevant parts of the treaties and conventions had to be incorporated into the domestic laws of the respective countries whose legal systems indicated that for such provisions to take legal effect they must be ratified by the majority members of the respective parliament or by some method …in other words then, the provisions had to be ratified by the majority members of the domestic parliaments of those countries or by use of the required legal methods…What is therefore staggering is that the Constitution of Barbados – a British document – having formed one out of the gamut of international laws the British government wrote and passed for their colonies – was NEVER EVER made part of the domestic law of this country….Tragically, it is only the amendments to the former Constitution that were themselves incorporated into the domestic law of Barbados……and which, because the 1966 Order has been revoked, has meant that all unrepealed laws – including those said Constitutional amendments over the years – and governmental and some private decisions made in pursuance to those laws, from 1964 right up to October 11th 2021 and beyond have been INVALIDATED…..ARE THEREFORE legally invalid and unenforceable….

    Hence, the puerile nonsense that Caswell Franklyn was reported to have written in the lead article over this thread – that the Parliament was passing a Constitution of Barbados in September/October 2021, must be understood, rejected and taken by the scruff of the neck by readers and commenters on BU, and thrown in the intellectual rubbish bin, for the entire total MADNESS that it is….and that – in this instance – Caswell Franklyn is made of…

    Franklyn is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG in law and in fact…

    For, at the time of the so-called debate in Parliament there was no Constitution Act – containing a new Constitution of Barbados , that was being debated and passed….For, the Barbados Independence Act 1966 was debated and passed in the British Parliament, and the 1966 Order – containing the last Constitution of Barbados – made in or enacted by the last UK monarch Privy Council pursuant to S..5 of the said Barbados Independence Act 1966….and laid in the Parliament of the UK…

    The government and people of Barbados had achieved fully responsible status on November 30 1966 and therefore was granted a Constitution to come into operation on that date…..So, in law and in fact, the Barbadian people and government were NOT getting another Constitution nor were they achieving another fully responsible status, at the time the horrible nonsense madness that was spewed for by Caswell Franklyn, about there being a Constitution passed in the Parliament of Barbados, when the government and people of Barbados had already received another one – the last one – in 1966 – in a line of those that came before… …..Too, were a Constitution having been passed in the Parliament, it would have necessitated the revocation of not only the the copy of the said original constitution….but also the original constitution which was not possible with the original constitution having remained in the UK and having been the property of the Biritish.. Furthermore, what the Parliament of Barbados was attempting to do was attempting to amend – NOT THE 1966 CONSTITUTION either – which is some where in the UK Parliament, UK Privy Council resting in peace – RIP….but a COPY of the said Constitution…..which is itself legally INVALID…..This copy has also become invalid because the original document – whose ownership copyrights having been lying with the British, has had its validity and validity of use by the Barbadian government and people, automatically withdrawn by the UK monarch, on account of the then BLP led Parliament and the then BLP regime intending to – and realizing such – the severing of all remaining constitutional ties with the UK monarch…

    The fact is that Franklyn – rather than resigning from his seat in an ILLEGALLY and UNCONSTITUTIONALLY constituted chamber of an ILLEGALLY and UNCONSTITUTIONALLY constituted Parliament whose acts, procedures and omissions have been null and void and of no legal effect since October 11 2021, sat in the Senate for the last portions of time up to the ILLEGAL dissolution of the Parliament, whilst there was no Constitution of Barbados – a most despicable and treacherous circumstance; has had and continue to have some friends and associates who continue to practice law in this country without LEGAL authority – and seeks to preserve such frienships and association by seeking a false justification – a false narrative – an alibi – (that a Constitution was passed) for viewing their continuining to practice law in Barbados – rather than losing some of such friendships and associations by coming to the right conclusions and saying them that they are practicing law without a Constitution – because these lawyer friends and associates of his were officers of the Supreme Court up to October 11, 2021, and because the Supreme Court is one of the governing structures in Barbados that have become ILLEGALLY and UNCONSTITUTIONALLY constituted, and whose acts and omissions have become ILLEGAL, NULL and VOID and of NO LEGAL EFFECT, these lawyer friends and associates of his are no longer officers of the Supreme Court, and therefore they no longer have legal authority to practice law in Barbados; and where he personally and professionally is concerned, because the law under which his Unity Workers Trade Union was registered – the Trade Union Act – is no longer valid, and therefore the Unity Workers Trade Union is functioning and continues to function ILLEGALLY in this country: these are some of the reasons why Franklyn is emptying such gross STUPIDITY, MADNESS on the senses of some of the people of this country…..that a Constitution was being passed in Parliament in September and October 2021, when such was clearly NOT the case…..

    His stance that there is a Constitution when there is NONE, clearly shows how intellectually dishonest, disingenous and perverted he too is (he joins Gregory Nicholls who was sometime ago sued for monies owed by a person; Dr Booby who himself has no legal authority to practice law in Barbados) ..and in all such intellectual dishonesty, disingenuity and depravity does seriously take away from all the good that led to some people at the Nation news paper titling him their personality of year a couple years ago..

  3. Yolande Grant - African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved. Avatar
    Yolande Grant – African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved.

    This thing is a real mess..

    ..so are they trying to pass off a schedule of a revoked pre independence order, as a constitution while knowing that the old constitution and the order cannot be separated from each other…ergo…neither can the schedule…making them and everything they touch highly illegitimate…

    I know am not going crazy but this is what the above essay sounds like..

  4. Midwest maniac Avatar
    Midwest maniac

    Side note to the blog master
    Please note that some comments require more than one steupse. Be fair with your grading system

  5. Yolande Grant - African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved. Avatar
    Yolande Grant – African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved.

    “Teenagers in devastating MYOCARDITIS (MYO) situations with damaged lungs & hearts after mRNA technology COVID injections; jail, take the medical license of all doctors who guided to take jabs & lied.”

    The doctors are the lowest hanging fruit and should get no less than full life sentences in prison.

    Further up the food chain are the ones who really lied to the people talking shite about they are following the science when they int even scientists….unbelieveable..

    How did it go again? “if ya die from the vaccine we can help you, but if you die from Covid, we can’t.”

    A whole crock pot of crap…from a crack pot.

  6. Frankie Avatar
    Frankie

    @PDC
    the key to your dissertation is “to whatever extent”. It is an almost non-existent extent. Lewwee go wuk up and grind and whine to “Follow de leader, follow de leader”

  7. The Peoples Democratic Congress (PDC) Avatar
    The Peoples Democratic Congress (PDC)

    Yolande Grant,

    There is a state of utter and serious constitutional mayhem, disorder and breakdown prevailing in this country…..

  8. Yolande Grant - African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved. Avatar
    Yolande Grant – African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved.

    I notice. Am still missing something though….pre independence order 1966….which will be 1965 and moving further in the past. What document was in place under emancipation, with colonial governors at the helm? There was no independence in that time period therefore no constitution and aspiring black politicians were only allowed in the parliament to wet their feet from the 1930s or there abouts, then became MPs etc by the 1950s….how can they possibly pass a schedule, created in Whitehall and attached to an order as a constitution in the 21st century, that’s a gray area for me..

    If they would tell the people what documents from that era binds them to the system we would have a better understanding but they keep doing sneaky underhanded disloyal/treacherous things to cover up their crimes. Everything is about them and their criminal career goals…hence their illegitimacy is shining brightly..

  9. Yolande Grant - African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved. Avatar
    Yolande Grant – African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved.

    Their supporters must be crushed, but what kind of degraded mindsets would support any of this which also adds up to their own demise anyway…

    But no one wants to deter them, they are exactly where they belong.

  10. David Avatar
    David

    Steuspe

  11. John Avatar
    John

    ..or is it?

  12. Yolande Grant - African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved. Avatar
    Yolande Grant – African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved.

    Would like to see what the 1200 plus lawyers at the bar do about this situation that is right in their professional yard, doing nothing but sitting waiting for overly ambitious frauds to further ruin the people and island is not exactly an upward moving career plan…

  13. John Avatar
    John

    The Peoples Democratic Congress (PDC) on April 9, 2023 at 9:35 PM said:
    Rate This

    Yolande Grant,

    There is a state of utter and serious constitutional mayhem, disorder and breakdown prevailing in this country…..

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    What would happen if every act that an unconstitutional parliament did since 2018 was null void and of no effect?

    Would we then have a constitution dating back to Independence?

  14. The Peoples Democratic Congress (PDC) Avatar
    The Peoples Democratic Congress (PDC)

    Yolande Grant,

    There were various colonial laws made by and put in place by the British colonial rulers…since the British settled in the 1620s…

    There was also a local Assembly which passed laws for the obedience of the people in Barbados….

    Many of these laws were inhuman and egregious…..

    If you read the Constitution Amendment No 2 Act 2021, to be exact S 4, carefully you will see that there is NO LAW that continued the Schedule/the Constitution, that there is NO LAW upon which it could have rested; that it was NEVER made part of the domestic law; that there is NO LAW (statute) in which it would have been constituted…..

    There is NO constitution……

    It does NOT exist in law……

  15. Yolande Grant - African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved. Avatar
    Yolande Grant – African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved.

    John…that colonial constitition is also null and void…did they not claim republic status in their desperation to screw it all up…that poison constitution cannot be reintroduced or hold up….and should be laughed out of existence if any clown tries..

    These are the same ones want to control a complex millennia old Empire that int dem wun..nor are they entitled….btw….but look what they did on a tiny island in a tiny parliament..

    …yall got real serious problems as defined in several written essays now making the rounds on social media…that’s why i called out the lawyers for sitting on their thumbs…instead of putting their training to work…before some self serving fool jumps out to tell them…they can only practice constitutional law in theory.. but cant hold anyone responsible for such colossal cockups.

  16. The Peoples Democratic Congress (PDC) Avatar
    The Peoples Democratic Congress (PDC)

    That is a brilliant question…..

    Recall though that the UK monarch accepted her deposition as Head of government of Barbados. The former Constitution had outlined the position of the UK monarch..as Head of government of Barbados…So the 1966 Constitution cannot be reverted to….

    This having become ILLEGAL, UNCONSTITUTIONAL and ILLEGITIMATE BLP regime should have brought about a NEW constitution in a NEW Constitution Act, at the point of breaking the remaining constitutional ties with the UK monarch..

  17. Yolande Grant - African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved. Avatar
    Yolande Grant – African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved.

    “In 1652 at The Mermaid Tavern in Oistins, the Charter of Barbados was signed between Oliver Cromwell’s representative and the Governor of Barbados who remained loyal to the King. The Charter guaranteed Barbados colonists rights and privileges unheard of in any other colony, iñcluding ŕights to their land and local control of taxation”

    This is the only document ratified for Barbados before the1966 pre-independence order, with possibly an attached schedule, and ONLY ONE CONSTITUTION the island has every had, some content from the 1652 Charter was also incorporated into the 1966 constitution.

    So where is the constitution Caswell speaks about…we need a copy..

  18. The Peoples Democratic Congress (PDC) Avatar
    The Peoples Democratic Congress (PDC)

    Yolande Grant,

    You continue to ask some very probing, pointed, valid questions….

    We in the PDC have been asking the few persons who have been saying that there is a Constitution: where is this constitution that they are referring to??

    So far, nobody has provided any answers as to where it is…

    Recently, in Bridgetown, even a well known lawyer was asked that question because she said there was one…..and there and then she replied that she “did not have a clue”..where it was…

  19. Yolande Grant - African Online Publishing. Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved. Avatar
    Yolande Grant – African Online Publishing. Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved.

    Lol…that’s because THERE IS NONE…there has only ever been the Oistin Charter from 1652…that i posted about here YEARS AGO, noticed no one opened any comment about it…..then in 1966…the independence constitution was introduced via Order with elements of the Oistin Charter inserted…

    They are certainly lying about any other constitution unless they can produce one…wont hold my breath….

    If ya spread enuff lies and rumors about a nonexistent constitution everyone believes it, dont know how they managed to convince Caswell.

    It’s wickedness on their part is why it BACKFIRED on them..

    Since that fraudulent republic parade without a constitution i have been telling the people they FREE and no longer under the criminal fraud that is parliament and the squatters occupying.

  20. Yolande Grant - African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved. Avatar
    Yolande Grant – African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved.

    What weeeee can ask is, since the Oistin Charter was in the earliest days of the Transatlantic Slave Trade 1652….were the colonial governors of the day given an updated Charter for the Emancipation period…and that’s what these frauds are using and calling it a constitution….based on what the fake pedigree clown said back in 2018 or 19 regarding
    “emancipation is a process.”

    In those days everything the crown did was endorsed by royal charter.

    Such a charter could never pass muster in the 21st century.

  21. Yolande Grant - African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved. Avatar
    Yolande Grant – African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved.

    “. I am concerned that Government has not attempted to clarify the situation and has allowed this dangerous nonsense to take root.”

    We also have to ask Caswell if he DEMANDED a copy of this phantom constitution from government..a constitution that should be made available for PUBLIC PERUSAL..by TAXPAYERS.

    By the way, no one has respect for a corrupt judiciary…the disrespect is TO TAXPAYERS and lay in the fact that it’s CORRUPT..

  22. David Avatar
    David

    The following is posted to the UK Parliament website. Would one expect the publisher to know the basics to what is required to amend the 1966 schedule?

    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/barbados-becomes-a-republic/

  23. The Peoples Democratic Congress (PDC) Avatar
    The Peoples Democratic Congress (PDC)

    Yolande Grant,

    The below is a copy to part of what Caswell Franklyn has in the above lead post…

    ———————————————————-

    An Act to alter the Constitution in order

    (a) to provide for Barbados to become a republic with a President who shall be Head of State of Barbados; and

    (b) to provide for related matters.

    It might have slipped pass many but one of the related matters was legislating, for the first in the Barbados Parliament, a constitution for this country. The original independence constitution of Barbados was never passed in our parliament, it was merely a schedule to an order in council, the Barbados Independence Order, made by Queen Elizabeth II.

    When Government decided to rush headlong into republican status; it did so without doing any adequate preparatory work. In order to meet the deadline of November 30, 2021, Government took its usual shortcuts approach by obtaining parliamentary approval, without first consulting the people of this country. On September 29, 2021 the Constitution (Amendment) (No.2) Bill, 2021 was passed in the House of Assembly, and it passed the Senate on October 6, 2021, with only one dissenting vote.

    The 1966 Barbados Constitution was a schedule to the Barbados Independence Order, made by Queen Elizabeth II. That order was revoked by subsection 4.(1) of Constitution (Amendment)(No.2) Act. Without more the Constitution would also have been revoked but that subsection went on to save the Constitution. For clarity, section 4 of the Constitution (Amendment)(No.2) Act states:

    4.(1) The Independence Order is revoked; but the revocation of that Order shall not affect the validity of the Constitution set out in the Schedule to that Order.

    (2) The Constitution referred to in subsection (1) shall be altered in accordance with the provisions of section 49 thereof in the manner and to the extent set out in this Act; and on the appointed day the Constitution so altered shall become the Constitution and supreme law of Barbados…

    ———–‐———————————————-

    Yolande Grant,

    A further critical analysis of the Caswell Franklyn article as posted above …shows how much he is out to sea in his purported understanding of the relevant laws….

    He made the point that one of the related matters provided for – by the Parliament – in the Act, was the legislating for the first time in Parliament of a constitution for Barbados…

    He is fundamentally, fundamentally wrong!

    Caswell is not as good a thinker as some people think he is…..

    What he is getting mixed up with is how to allocate purposes and matters in the right ways in his own mind and to provide such in words..in the right contexts..

    For, what he falsely referred to as a related matter – legislating a Constitution – is a purpose and albeit a false one at that…..and as such cannot be a MATTER related to the bringing about, in the words of the former Constitution Amendment No 2 Act.., of a REPUBLIC, with a President who shall be the Head of State, when already the wording in the Act (the long title) suggested that the purpose of the Act was to indicate to the relevant members of parliament and people of Barbados the legislating of such matters (Republic, Office of President, Election of President, Immunity of President, Oaths, Barbados Police Service, etc)…The latter when taken as a whole – as a category of matters following from the named items…CANNOT LOGICALLY include but must exclude legislating a Constitution as a related matter….The above named greatly relates to structures within a constitutional framework, whereas legislating a Constitution, greatly relates to a legilative process outside of that frameworking..

    Caswell is therefore not only tautological…in a big sense, but also is ILLOGICAL in another bigger sense….In the latter sense, it is known to many people that in Section 49.5 of the former Constitution, the Parliament could only have REVOKED the Constitution, MODIFIED it or SUSPENDED it……

    What Parliament enacted was indeed an amendment (yes another series of changes) to (sic) the Constitution of Barbados…and NOT any Constitution…The Constitution that the Parliament referred to in Section 4 (1) and Section 4 (2) is though not the same Constitution as that in 1966, with the amendments over the years, was still the same Constitution up to 2021, but without those amendments made over the years…..Hence, this trade unionist – in unwisely parroting regurgitating the words of Parliament – which had failed to make such distinctions – clearly failed to project that the actual AMENDMENTS TO THE
    CONSTITUTION OVER the years are stand alone laws – which were not the results of the carrying out of the purposes of legislating any Constitution… but the results of the carrying out of the purposes of amending the Constitution – hence mere words and references coming out of the same parliamentary process DO NOT CHANGE FROM ONE CONSTITUTION TO ANOTHER; MODIFY PROVISIONS IN A CONSTITUTION, ETC, – BUT NEW THINKING; PASSING OF NEW LAWS/PROVISIONS, FOLLOWED BY FRESH ACTIONS….

    Franklyn – clearly not an intellectual – though he might fancy himself as one – FAILED to indicate what were the predications and assumptions upon which this Constitution was so-called passed….

    What is clear is that Franklyn is intellectually dishonest, disingenuous and perverted…He ought to know better that what the then Parliament passed was an amendment containing proposed changes to the Constitution..

    Also, for him to assert that the former Parliament had legislated – for the first time – a Constitution for Barbados is ABSOLUTE FOOLISHNESS MADNESS…as Parliament did not have the constitutional right, power, authority to legislate for the continuation of the former Constitution, as that the said former Constitution was already enacted in the British Parliament…The Constitution was the supreme law and Parliament must have acted consistently with the provisions of Constitution….Messaging that Parliament did not have the constitutional right, power authority to legislate for continuation of a British document, is NOT the same as saying that Parliament did not have the right to legislate a NEW CONSTITUTION or AMENDMENTS to the OLD constitution..or to REVOKE or SUSPEND IT….

    What makes Franklyn’s writings so ILLOGICAL and NONSENSICAL was that having accepted that the Parliament “saved” the Constitution he FAILED to indicate the legal constitutional basis upon which it or the Schedule was saved, because a careful reading of the S. 4 (1) a la the Independence Order is revoked. But the REVOCATION of the Order shall NOT affect the validity of the Constitution as set out in the Schedule to the Order….does not show what saved the Constitution (and or the Schedule?), how and where it or they were saved…

    A full and proper reading of such does NOT amount any way near to a proper or any understanding that there was a supposing saving of the Constitution (and or the Schedule?) upon the revocation of the Order…

    So, whereas this ILLEGAL BLP regime falsely assumed that the Constitution and the Schedule lived on without the Order, Franklyn falsely posited that it was saved (and why not the Schedule were saved too?)…

    Whereas this ILLEGAL, UNCONSTITUTIONAL BLP regime falsely purported to amend the Constitution of Barbados, Franklyn falsely posited that Parliament passed a Constitution of Barbados…

    Both are fundamentally, fundamentally wrong, wrong….as that the Constitution no longer exists…..consequent upon the invalidation of the Barbados Independence Act 1966, and the revocation of the Revocation of the Barbados Independence Order 1966…on October 11, 2021…

    What is worse is that a full and proper reading of the relevant wording in the former Constitution Amendment No 2 Act 2021 – the wording related to the existing laws shows that Parliament did not save , and using Franklyn’s use of the term save, the existing laws upon the revocation of the Order…They did not show what, how and where such laws were saved…

    In concluding, it is clear that the trade unionist – a once bright star in a once legally constituted Senate – until it became illegally constituted- has come up with a series of glaring
    misstatements to add to the alibi that he has made with respect to the passing of a Constitution….

    What a terrible and inglorious shame!

  24. Yolande Grant - African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved. Avatar
    Yolande Grant – African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved.

    “What Parliament enacted was indeed an amendment (yes another series of changes) to (sic) the Constitution of Barbados…and NOT any Constitution…”

    I read those amendments that were inserted over the 56 year period, there were at least 18 amendments.

    Where Caswell fell down is in not asking the parliament to produce the constitution/schedule that apparently NO ONE HAS SEEN…and he should ask for it seeing as he put himself out there believing they have one and actually telling the public that although no obe can say there is one.

    I still hold firm that it is a fraud republic without any republic constitution and trying to make it up as they go along. ..as usual, they muddle everything like tha abject and famous failures they are historically…

    Amendments to a colonial constitution acting as a republic constitution….these are not ready and never will be, cockup artists.

  25. Yolande Grant - African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved. Avatar
    Yolande Grant – African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved.

    Caswell should have CONFIRMED the validity of what they claim they have FIRST knowing their history. He still can.

  26. a republic with or without a constitution Avatar
    a republic with or without a constitution

    “I still hold firm that it is a fraud republic without any republic constitution”

    you can be a republic with or without a constitution
    the first step is gaining independence
    the next step is develop a constitution
    (USA gained independence in 1776 the nation’s first constitution was in 1789)

    There is already a legacy constitution in Barbados which was amended 2021

  27. Yolande Grant - African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved. Avatar
    Yolande Grant – African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved.

    Do you have a copy of it, post it…

    What legacy constitution you mean the colonial legacy…so it’s a colonial republic…yall full of shit.

    Think this is some joke..

    Every countries constitution can be pulled up ONLINE…except that one…..so post it..

  28. Yolande Grant - African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved. Avatar
    Yolande Grant – African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved.

    Historically DISHONEST and LYING..cannot be trusted at anytime of the day or night…

    Am waiting to see the constitution posted.

    ..dont know what got into Caswell that he would believe these frauds without actually seeing the document.

  29. Vapors remix Avatar
    Vapors remix

    Sometimes more often than not your logic is more akin to a wolf howling at the moon.
    There are the same laws in place and Barbados is not in a state of anarchy.
    Anarchy is a society without a government. It may also refer to a society or group of people that entirely rejects a set hierarchy.

  30. Bush Tea Avatar
    Bush Tea

    Anarchy is a society without a government.
    …and brassbowlery is one without common sense.

  31. The Peoples Democratic Congress (PDC) Avatar
    The Peoples Democratic Congress (PDC)

    Yolande Grant,

    Only one section of the Constitution Amendment No 2 Act 2021….did come into force….on October 11, 2021….
    With that having come about, the Barbados Independence Act 1966 became invalidated….and the Barbados Independence Order 1966 (constitution ) became REVOKED…

    Therefore, the remainder of the Act never came into force….

    Section 14 and by extension the entire Act have become null and void and NO legal effect on account of there being no longer a Constitution….

    So those amendments have come to nought….

    Caswell Franklyn himself does not know where the Constitution is..

    He has become a thoroughly intellectually dishonest, disingenuous and perverted individual in these affairs..

    He has disappointed me tremendously…

  32. Bush Tea Avatar
    Bush Tea

    Bushie was thinking about getting this debate about whether or not we had a constitution, but on second thought, the bushman decided to keep away from shiite talk.
    What the Hell difference does a Constitution make when no-one gives two ‘bowel movements’ about what ANY of Laws says any damn how?

    Shiite… we had a ‘constitution’ when the local queen decided that she wanted a minister of edykashun from over and away – BUT who DID NOT qualify under the ‘stution -so WHAT HAPPENED?

    Little Tommy was needed to promote bit coins and to offer political support- but the ‘stution was saying some unwelcome shiite – WHAT HAPPENED?

    Some little KK schoolboy gained favor with the empress and was almost rewarded with a “Peter’s Principle” appointment ..EVEN THOUGH the ’stution’ clearly said otherwisely..

    A former PM wanted to bring a glorified court clerk from the USA to be CJ, but the ‘stution’ had in some ‘foolishness’ about qualifications for the post… WHAT HAPPENED?

    Constitution shiite!! … waste of damn time – and obviously only ‘useful’ if it says what the big chief wants it to say, else, it is just changed or ignored…

    Constitutions are for ‘real real’ PEOPLE, who take themselves seriously – not for brass bowl clowns.

    steupsss..
    Wunna think Bushie got time to spin top in shiite mud…?

  33. Tron Avatar
    Tron

    As I said, the will of our Supreme Leader is the supreme law of the nation. Written legislation is for novices.

    It is crucial that judges and lawyers always ask themselves: How would our Supreme Leader act? That is the benchmark of all just action.

    Tron, year 5 SL, year 2 NR

  34. The Peoples Democratic Congress (PDC) Avatar
    The Peoples Democratic Congress (PDC)

    David,

    The immediately below was copied from the same information on the Library of the House of Common website..

    However, it contains a number of false, misleading and erroneous impressions, and gross and egregious inaccuracies and misrepresentations…and much troubling lacunae….

    “In order to become a republic, the Barbados Parliament had to amend the Barbados Independence Order 1966, something that required a two-thirds majority. Although some questioned whether this was possible, as an independent country Barbados could amend or repeal any part of its statute book, including acts and orders passed by the UK Parliament before 1966″….

    ———————————————————-

    The Barbados Parliament NEVER amended the Barbados Independence Order 1966…..

    The Barbados Parliament only amended the Constitution…(only Section 14 entered into force on October 11, 2021…and was there and then followed by the below…..

    The Barbados Independence Act 1966 was invalidated and the Barbados Independence Order 1966 – including the Constitution – revoked on the promulgation of Section 14…..

    The Barbados Parliament could NEVER EVER REVOKE the 1966 Act…although they could have invalidated and did invalidate it, by making it no longer applicable to the Barbadian authorities and people…..by promulgating the said Section 14….

    The Barbados Parliament could NEVER EVER EXPRESSLY REVOKE the 1966 Order (even if such a statement to such an effect was written into an Act..such as the Constitution Amendment No 2 Act 2021) …..only IMPLIEDLY have done so….

    The 1966 Act and the 1966 Order were British laws…They were NEVER EVER part of the domestic law of Barbados…They did not form part of the statute books of Barbados….

    The former Constitution was the supreme law of Barbados….In drafting and passing the Constitution Amendment No 2 Act 2021, and any other laws, Parliament had to make sure such was consistent with the letter and spirit of the Constitution….Hence, note had to taken that Parliament did not have the constitutional right, power, authority to give effect to the constitution….(See alibi below).Such had nothing to do with whether Barbados was an independent country operating outside of the orbit of power and respinsibility of the UK…but everything to do with the Parliament of Barbados and the government having respect for rule by reference to law and to their constitutional obligations to other governing authorities and the people of Barbados…

    Finally, in contemplating absence of the 1966 Order, it was necessary for the then BLP led Parliament to have understood that the Constitution and the Order were legally inseperable and that therefore it was impossible to continue with the Constitution without the UK monarch’s Order, from which it was indicated via the Order that the Constitution was given its validity – there was no legal constitutional basis upon which the constitution could have been continued with and upon which it could have been rested (the Parliament of Barbados could not give its own validity to the Constitution (which could not have been even expressed via a local law) when, upon, or not, the revocation of the Order, it still needed a valid Constitution to help give effect to such an amendment as the Constitution Amendment No 2 Act 2021, and there was no domestic law upon which it was rested as that to exist in law the constitution had to meet such a criterion).. …It was because of the impossibility of the existence of the two situations that another alibi was created: that there was a Constitution of Barbados (besides the one that Caswell mentioned Parliament passing a Constitution)……..

  35. John Avatar
    John

    The Peoples Democratic Congress (PDC)
    on April 10, 2023 at 11:21 AM said:
    Rate This

    That is a brilliant question…..

    Recall though that the UK monarch accepted her deposition as Head of government of Barbados. The former Constitution had outlined the position of the UK monarch..as Head of government of Barbados…So the 1966 Constitution cannot be reverted to….

    This having become ILLEGAL, UNCONSTITUTIONAL and ILLEGITIMATE BLP regime should have brought about a NEW constitution in a NEW Constitution Act, at the point of breaking the remaining constitutional ties with the UK monarch..

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    You don’t get it!

    An unconstitutional Parliament can’t change the existing constitution any more than a rum shop gathering can!!!

    Members of the House of Assembly could as well be meeting in a rum shop because without a Leader of the opposition chosen by the group which opposes the Government, the House of Assembly can’t become a Parliament.

    30 – 0 means there is no group opposing the Government.

    There has been no Government since 2018!!

  36. John Avatar
    John

    Yolande Grant – African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved. on April 10, 2023 at 6:37 PM said:
    Rate This

    “What Parliament enacted was indeed an amendment (yes another series of changes) to (sic) the Constitution of Barbados…and NOT any Constitution…”

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    How can an unconstitutional parliament get this done?

    Null void and of no effect.

  37. Yolande Grant - African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved. Avatar
    Yolande Grant – African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved.

    “Constitutions are for ‘real real’ PEOPLE, who take themselves seriously – not for brass bowl clowns.”

    Wuh i thought i would come here this morning and see the FAUX constitution posted, the way some are acting like the document actually exists…

    Yuh right, i got better, more fulfilling progressive things to do with my time.

  38. David Avatar
    David

    @PDC

    The former Senator is more than capable of defending himself especially as it relates to matters of law and related matters. The Blogmaster will happily defer to him. As far as the Blogmaster was able to understand from those more knowledgeable, there NTSH.

  39. Yolande Grant - African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved. Avatar
    Yolande Grant – African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved.

    Ah guess this dont apply to certain people in Barbados…the rest CAN sue the hell outta AstraZeneca and get paid out too cause they did not get inside a supreme court setting and concluded that the vaccines dont cause death and injury when DEM INT NO SCIENTIST…..reap what you sow.

    “We’re not antivaxxers… we have lost loved ones’: Widower of BBC presenter who died from Covid-19 vaccine complications launches legal action against AstraZeneca on behalf of 75 people whose ‘relatives passed away or suffered jab-related injuries’

  40. Yolande Grant - African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved. Avatar
    Yolande Grant – African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved.

    Saw an article headlined ….”constitution draft coming in Seotember”..Caswell ya may get a real constitution yet…

  41. Yolande Grant - African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved. Avatar
    Yolande Grant – African Online Publishing Copyright (c) 2023. All Rights Reserved.

    Btw, not for nothing, but this was a topic yesterday, it says a lot about the relationship between them and their mischief makers when they NEVER told them that what they did in my CASE, is ACTIONABLE squared…they have the details and KNOW …but walked the ignorant (slaves) straight into lawsuit exposure…not that i give a shit…but….maybe they learned something or not…..not my concern.

    Dont know how they think this will end, but it’s their problem.

  42. David Avatar
    David

    Constitution reform draft by September
    With public consultations now closed, the Constitution Reform Commission (CRC) will begin poring through Barbadians’ submissions, with the hope of producing a first draft of the revision of the country’s supreme law by September.
    During a press conference at Parliament yesterday to update the country on the progress being made on the long-awaited reform, deputy chairman of the commission, Senator Gregory Nicholls, disclosed that following consultations with stakeholders locally and in the diaspora, 120 submissions were received for consideration.
    “We received some 120 submissions and those are submissions that the public made in writing. We had submissions from the 50 or so state-owned groups, organisations, non-governmental bodies, as well as members of the general public representing various organisations and associations.
    “This is in addition to the town hall meetings where we took copious detailed records. We also had a very active online and social media presence, where we accepted comments from members of the public. What we have done so far is to collate the submissions and did summaries of them,” Nicholls said.
    Nicholls, who has spearheaded several court challenges based on constitutional grounds, said that the submissions provided significant insight into the rights which Barbadians were most concerned about. However, he pointed out that some would require greater research to determine
    if they could be covered by constitutional legislation. Among the recurring themes for consideration, was whether greater power and autonomy should be ascribed to the office of the President in the administration of the country’s affairs.
    “There are submissions from the Government perspective regarding what the structure and powers of the Executive should be. There are some reports on the strengthening of the powers of the head of state. This includes giving more autonomy and power to the head of state to perform more functions around the administration of the country,” Nicholls explained.
    He added: “There are also a number of hot topic issues, human rights is a big issue for Barbadians, as it should be. There was also a lot of concern about parental rights and the need to have parental rights as a constitutional right. Enhancement of basic civil and economic rights has also been a very consistent theme that we see in the presentations. The Constitution does not provide for economic rights as is the case in other countries with developed systems and democracies.”
    The deputy chairman also disclosed that the commission has consulted with several legal academics. He noted that these academics also played a significant role in educating stakeholders in civics and governance structures, a move which aided in keeping submissions within the permissible parameters of a constitution.
    He said that the CRC had engaged the research assistance from the University of the West Indies which helped with collating information based on the submission.
    “Every submission that has been received by the Commission will be considered, no submission will be edited or thrown out. The hard work now begins to unpack all of these discussions. We have had some very important contributions from the academic community,” he said.
    (CLM)


    Source: Nation

  43. The Peoples Democratic Congress (PDC) Avatar
    The Peoples Democratic Congress (PDC)

    This so-called Constitutional Review Commission is an ILLEGAL body…

    It is illegalĺy and unconstitutionally body……

    All those who have been part of it, have been illegally appointed to an ILLEGAL body….

    So, Mr Christopher Blackman;

    Reverend Dr John Rogers;

    Gregory Nicholls;

    Adriel Brathwaite;

    Mary-Anne Redman;

    Kerryann Ifill;

    Suleiman Bulbulia;

    Chris deCaires;

    Sade Jemmott;

    Khaleel Kothdiwala;

    Cynthia Barrow-Giles…

    All of the above mentioned persons have been sitting on a so-called Commission that has been ILLEGALLY established based on an ILLEGAL decision by an ILLEGALLY and UNCONSTITUTIONALLY constituted Cabinet whose acts and omissions are themselves ILLEGAL, NULL and VOID and of NO LEGAL EFFECT…

    Furthermore the Commission of Enquiry is no longer a valid law….

    The fact of the matter is that there is NO constitution of Barbados, as a result of the INVALIDATION of the Barbados Independence Act 1966, and the REVOCATION of the Barbados Independence Order 1966 which contained the constitution…on October 11, 2021…

    This ILLEGALLY and UNCONSTITUTIONALLY constituted Commission CANNOT LEGALLY recommend any DRAFT constitution for Barbados…..

    Though otherwise fair persons in the carrying out of their different roles in this Barbadian society, they have been doing a tremendous disservice to the mass of people of Barbados when they have been found to be encouraging Barbadians to participate in an ILLEGAL and UNCONSTITUTIONAL process by way of inviting them to make submissions to make them and envcouraging them to appear in person in public before them at set venues…..

  44. Proprioception Interoception Avatar
    Proprioception Interoception

    Proprioception & Interoception: Making sense of it all!

    Proprioception – The sense of our body in the space around us.

    Interoception – The sense of our internal organs and feeling our emotions.

    Vestibular – The sense of balance and spatial awareness when combining movement with balance.

    What is the difference between proprioception and interoception?
    You probably know proprioception as the system that helps you determine where your body is in space. So, for example, it’s proprioception that keeps you from walking into the wall. While interoception is commonly thought of as the system that sends you messages from inside your body to do things like pee or eat.

  45. Constitution or Not Avatar
    Constitution or Not

    This is a ⚠️ Warning
    Constitution or Not
    USA (Constitution) & Israel (No Constitution)
    Both show us the problem with Religious Bigots / Extremists in Power
    abusing and overreaching Laws

    Secret Governments
    Spying and Classified Secrets show us Governments do wrong and make it a secret that can never be admitted and must be denied in law

  46. David Avatar
    David

    Areas of concern for Constitution
    by MORRIS GREENIDGE

    THE SATURDAY SUN’S REPORTING on political scientist Devaron Bruce’s recent address on constitutional matters is required studying. His remarks are timely, and they come towards the end of a period of constitutional review. He has listed four main areas of concern, and has skirted briefly on a fifth matter that should concern all Barbadians:
    1. Appointment of an independent Attorney General.
    2. Appointment of an independent Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
    3. Appointment of an independent Speaker of Parliament.
    4. Appointment of an independent Deputy Speaker.
    5. The regularising of the parliamentary cycle via a set election schedule.
    I shall attempt to sail around items 1, 3, and 4 for the moment, but shall dare to add a sixth and seventh not mentioned by the erudite lecturer.
    2. Barbados is seemingly without a currently functioning PAC as we knew it, and that is largely because there is currently no Opposition party or person in Parliament, from which the PAC normally had its being. I shall attempt to address that issue at No. 6 below 5. The speaker talked about the current arbitrarily selected election date, but glossed over his own simply stated solution of a fixed date. The following is offered as a possible solution: Every five years beginning in the year 2025, there shall be elections for a new Parliament. These elections to be held on the second Thursday of August in the election year. Orderly transition, including publicly taken oaths of office shall take place and the new Government shall be installed on the first Thursday of September following such elections. An Elections Transition Commission shall be appointed and in place by the first day of August preceding the election date.
    6. To ensure the constant viability of the Public Accounts Committee, my own preference would be to leave it in Opposition, but there shall be an Opposition in Parliament, for we must find a way to resolve the current anomaly by instituting the following or similar measure: In the event that no member of an opposing party to the Government has been elected, the President shall Install an Opposition of ten per cent of the elected members of the Lower House.
    This Opposition must be selected on the basis of proportional representation and added to those members elected. The House shall add the three seats to Parliament for this specific purpose. This arrangement shall end if subsequent constituency elections place more than one member in Opposition, or in the event of the seats of more than one elected member being vacated, are won by members opposed to the governing party. No member who is appointed under this section shall be able to “cross the floor” but may resign the seat thus leaving the President free to appoint someone else in his or her place 7. Our President seems in good health, and long may she so continue. However, in her enforced absence from duty – for any reason – her temporary successor must arise from a constitutionally appointed hierarchy. Barbados, having separated from the church in 1968, and considering the possibility of the need for some knowledge of the law, my own preference would be to revert to the ancient practice of turning towards the bench rather than the pulpit. Two hierarchical options are here listed: 1. President, 2. Honourable Chief Justice, 3.Next Senior Judge; or 1. President, 2. Honourable Chief Justice, 3. Honourable Speaker or 4. President of Senate providing either 3 or 4 is a lawyer, in the stated order The Constitution may also need to address the appointment (or election) of the President of republic, in the first place, but that is the subject of another discussion.
    The speaker’s reliance on “independents” (meaning no political affiliation nor leaning) in items 1 to 4, does not offer much comfort to the fool that I am, but Bruce is right, and we need a strong Constitution, if only to underline the fact that a lightweight champion can indeed pack a powerful punch in world affairs.
    Morris Greenidge is a historian. This article was submitted as a Letter to the Editor.

    Source: Nation

Older Comments
1 2 3

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading