Skip to main content

A Past but Useful Guide

There is a raging debate over the constitutional position of a Jamaican citizen who has acquired the citizenship status of another Commonwealth state and his eligibility to sit in Parliament. In short, whether Section 40. (2) (a) captures such an individual—commonly referred to as a “Commonwealth dual citizen”.

We have submitted on numerous occassions that such an individual is disqualified from being duly nominated for election (House of Representatives); disqualified from being duly appointed (Senate); and should such a status be achieved after being seated in Parliament, then that seat shall become vacant.

An historical examination of the development of the Constitution of Jamaica since Independence reveals in very clear and precise terms how the matter of Jamaican citizenship was to be treated in cases where another citizenship status was acquired by a Jamaican citizen.

Section 8, side-captioned “Deprivation of citizenship on acquisition or exercise of rights of another country” stated:



8. (1) If the Governor ­General is satisfied that any citizen of Jamaica has at any time after the fifth day of August 1962 acquired by registration, naturalization or other voluntary and formal act (other than marriage) the citizenship of any country other than Jamaica, the Governor General may by order deprive that person of his citizenship.


(2) If the Governor General is satisfied that any citizen of Jamaica has at any time after the fifth day of August 1962 voluntarily claimed and exercised in a country other than Jamaica any rights available to him under the law of that country, being rights accorded exclusively to its citizens, the Governor ­General may by order deprive that person of his citizenship.



Although the above has been repealed (Act 16 of 1999 sec 6), it provides a useful guide to the application of the disqualification provision in Section 40 (2)(A). It is submitted that the interpretation of the various sections of any Constitution must be internally consistent. In other words, a given set of circumstances cannot at the same time provide a basis for the deprivation of Jamaican citizenship and not disqualify that individual from sitting in Parliament.

Source:Jamaica Observer 12.3.09
A great deal of time and energy could have been saved if some guidance was sought as to how the Constitution of Jamaica over time treated the matter of Jamaican citizenship. The language is clear and precise leaving no room for exotic interpretations or legalese.

At the risk of being annoyingly repititous: any Jamaican citizen who voluntarily acquires or exercises the citizen status or exclusive rights of any country other than Jamaica is disqualified.

The operative date is Nomination Day for those seeking election to the House of Representatives and the date of appointment for those selected for the Senate (Sec 39).

Regrettably, this public debate runs the risk of being an exercise in futility as it has dire consequences for the composition of Parliament. Note, that even US green card holders are disqualified under this interpretative guide. Political expediency trumps the Rule of Law with increasing frequency in ex-colonial territories. History is replete with politicians employing the subterfuge of awaitng the judicial outcomes of individual cases and seeking the refuge of a “Select Parliamentary Committee”. These are safe havens for the disqualified sitting in exalted positions, sworn to uphold the very Constitution that they themselves knowingly continue to subvert.

And we wonder why we are called “Third World”.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

"Declaration" Not "Determination"

Both the Prime Minister and the Speaker of the House of Representatives have conveniently confused calls for declaration of citizenship status by Members of either House with the determination of questions as to membership of either House. The Chief Justice of Jamaica has determined that individuals who have renewed their US passports and travelled thereon are disqualified from being validly elected or appointed as a Member of either House. Proponents of the impotence of the Speaker, in the matter of requiring a declaration by individual members, have sought to rely on Section 44 (1) of the Constitution which states: Any question whether - a. any person has been validly elected or appointed as a member of either House; or b. any member of either House has vacated his seat therein or is required, under the provisions of subsection (3) or subsection (4) of section 41 of this Constitution, to cease to exercise any of his functions as a member, shall be determined by the Supreme Court ...

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...

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...