Skip to main content

That Commonwealth Citizen - The dual citizenship debate(Part 3)

Consternation:

Some amount of consternation has been generated by the treatment of “Commonwealth Citizens. Of particular concern is the concluding comment that:

“If an adult Jamaican citizen by virtue of his own act acquires the nationality of another state – be it Commonwealth or otherwise – he is disqualified. However an adult Commonwealth citizen living in Jamaica for a year satisfies the condition of Section 39 whether or not he acquires Jamaican citizenship.”

The consternation lies with adult Jamaican who have acquired citizenship of other Commonwealth countries – for example Britain, Canada, Barbados and Grenada to mention a few. Some have lived and studied in the respective territories and being duly qualified were successful in their application. Others found it necessary to take out some “insurance” in the heady days of the ideological 70’s. Indeed, there was the belief that citizenship in other Commonwealth territories meant that as a “Commonwealth Citizen” – albeit twice or even thrice over – one could still participate in the Parliament of Jamaica.

Further Agony:

We have advanced some of the arguments why Commonwealth states – other than Jamaica – are regarded as “foreign Powers or States” in terms of the Constitution of Jamaica.

Some attorneys-at-law currently sitting in our Parliament have vehemently opposed the interpretation and analysis advanced. It has become necessary to go into further detail about the constitutional position on the subject of “Commonwealth Citizen” as this is the base category (Section 39(a)) from which the composition of the Parliament is drawn.

The Constitution of Jamaica Section 9 (1) states:

“9.-(1) Every person who under the Constitution or any Act of Parliament is a citizen of Jamaica OR under any enactment for the time being in force in any country to which this section applies is a citizen of that country shall, by virtue of that citizenship, have the status of a Commonwealth citizen.”(emphasis added)

Note that the conjunction OR is used; and not the combination “and/or”. Hence, it is an exclusive rather than an inclusive condition. In so far as the Constitution is concerned a Jamaican is a Commonwealth citizen; so too are citizens of the territories listed in Section 9 (2) (3).

Real Scenarios

It must be highlighted that the base category outlined in the qualifying section, Section 39(a) speaks to “Commonwealth citizen” and not Jamaican citizen. In that sense the Jamaican citizen is treated no different from that of other Commonwealth states. Here are some interesting examples:

  • If an adult Jamaican by virtue of his own act acquires the citizenship of another Commonwealth state – he is disqualified.
  • If an adult Commonwealth citizen (who is not Jamaican) by virtue of his own act acquires the citizenship of another Commonwealth State (other than Jamaica) – he is disqualified.
  • If an adult Commonwealth citizen (who is not Jamaican) by virtue of his own act acquires Jamaican citizenship – he is not disqualified.
  • If an adult Commonwealth citizen being a Member of either House does anything to dilute, divert or divide his allegiance to the Jamaican state – his seat stands to be declared “vacant”.

Concluding Comments

For those holding dual Commonwealth citizenship status they have to contend with the definition of the disqualifying term “foreign Power or State” which is a term of art with a settled definition under International Law and have been utilized in numerous decided cases.

Indeed, it must be of top priority that those duly sworn to uphold the Constitution of Jamaica are in harmony with the provisions of the said Constitution. That the provisions were not rigorously enforced in the previous Parliament is no justification for their continued non-enforcement. The public spotlight must first be turned on those who hold the highest positions in the state – they are accountable to the People of Jamaica via the Constitution. That is the first step for any country purporting to adhere to the Rule of Law.

Labels:

Comments

Anonymous said…
The only consideration worth debating here is when will the constitution be amended.
March 13, 2009 at 2:12 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Appealing the By-Election Order

Abraham Dabdoub's appeal against the Chief Justice's ruling can be divided into two overlapping and intertwined phases: That the Chief Justice erred in law by failing to award the seat to the only duly nominated candidate on Nomination Day, August 7, 2007 in the constituency of West Portland; and That the Chief Justice erred in law by failing to recognize and properly apply the distinction between " status " and " conduct " in coming to her decision on disqualification based on dual citizenship. Numerous cases on votes being declared to be "thrown away" and the next candidate being duly seated by the court are cited. The detailed submissions are set out below: Publish at Scribd or explore others: Law
Post a Comment
Read more

By-Election Predisposition

Introduction A massive amount of time and resources have been devoted to the issue of the course to be properly taken once a victorious electoral candidate has been found to be "disqualified" under S. 40 of the Constitution of Jamaica. Simply put, the crux of the matter is whether the second place candidate should, without more, be accorded the seat by the court; or that the said election be deemed null and void and a by-election ordered to decide the people's representative. This matter consumed inordinate amounts of energy - judicial and otherwise - due primarily to the silence of the Constitution on what recourse should be adopted in such circumstance. A cardinal tenet of democratic government is that the people must decide their representatives and not a select grouping - no matter their qualification or status. The Constitution of Jamaica fully recognized this imperative even though it expressly delegates the determination of questions as to membership of either Ho...
4 comments
Read more

Communication Error!

Jamaica Gleaner Contributor, Martin Henry has written an interesting article entitled “Victory for the rule of law” published on Sunday, April 20, 2008 . In his last paragraph Henry stated: " A troubled citizen's concerns about the legitimacy of laws passed in the past with the participation of MPs who may have been in Daryl Vaz's dual-allegiance position was published as The Letter of the Day by The Gleaner last Wednesday [April 16]. Lawyer Dr Paul Ashley made a great deal out of the same issue when we both appeared on the TV programme Impact on that same day. The Constitution dissolves these fears in the wisely anticipatory provision of Section 51 (2): "The presence or participation of any person not entitled to be present or to participate in the proceedings of the House shall not invalidate those proceedings." Interpreting legal provisions is an exercise fraught with dangers, especially if one is not acquainted with the rules governing interpretation. Without...
2 comments
Read more