Skip to main content

Real Sanctions Needed

The dual citizenship saga has demonstrated the clear and urgent need for effective deterrents in respect of breaches in the supreme law of the land – the Constitution – by those sworn to uphold its provisions. It is evident that political expediency has trumped principle. Our law makers have effectively turned a blind eye to their colleagues who knowingly and blatantly perpetuate breaches of the Constitution.

The offending parties wait to be “discovered” and then take advantage of the pathetically slow pace of justice to prolong the breach. The substantial cost of civil litigation have forced some to fess up and hurriedly take the appropriate action to regularize their occupancy. However, the cost of litigation apart, the offenders are able to keep their ill-gotten gains – the proceeds of their constitutional crimes.

As presently constituted, the penalties under the Constitution are laughable and have never been enforced publicly in breach. In the absence of a culture of transparency, accountability and resignation, it becomes necessary to outline in detail real sanctions to deter would-be offenders and punish those lacking the requisite political integrity. To that end, it is being proposed that the Parliament consider amending the Constitution of Jamaica to include the following provision:

Where a Member of Parliament has occupied a seat in Parliament in breach of the Constitutional provisions for a specific period of time, that Member shall not be entitled to the remuneration and pension provisions that have been paid or will be due to be paid for that specific period of time.

Comments

Anonymous said…
I agree with you, it is time to revisit and amend the constitutionto include your suggestion The ill-gottn gains should be channeled back to the treasury and leave these bare faced dishonourable usurpers bereft, naked and hungry.
Anonymous said…
Good Article

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

"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 ...