Puerto Rico Bar Association Addresses contemporary colonialism at UN Seminar

*****

Representative calls for 'more vigor and creativity' from the U.N. in the Decolonisation process in the Third International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism

Statement before the Caribbean Regional Seminar 

United Nations Special Committee on Decolonisation

Caribbean Regional Seminar

St. Vincent and the Grenadines

31st May 2011

Wilma E. Reverón-Collazo

Puerto Rico Bar Association

 Mr. President H.E. Francisco Carrión Mena; other members of the Committee; distinguished delegates, participants and other public present.

Allow me to begin by congratulation Ambassador Carrión Mena for his election as president of this important committee. Your extensive diplomatic experience will certainly enrich the work of the Committee.

I appear before you on behalf of the Puerto Rico Bar Association, the oldest institution of Puerto Rico’s civil society, founded in 1840, which year after year has made important contributions to the discussions before this Committee.

Mr. President, we face the matter before us regarding the “Third Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism; goals and expected accomplishments”, with a heavy heart. The mere fact that we are here discussing a Third Decade causes frustration and desperation to the people of the territories who still have not achieved their independence, more so in the case of my motherland who has never tasted the sweet honey of freedom.

Upon reviewing the general situation in the Caribbean, specifically in  those territories that are still listed, I ask myself: Why are we talking about this in the 21^st. Century? Didn’t Res. 1514(XV) proclaim the equality of all nations big and small? Wasn’t it clearly established that colonialism is a crime against humanity, a gross violation of human rights?

The right to decolonization is born out of the people’s  fundamental supreme human right to self-determination. That right is founded on the principle of government by consent enshrined in the United States Declaration of Independence of 1776:

”Governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

US President Woodrow Wilson  considered the right to self-determination an essential norm in the conduction of  international relations:

“No peace can last, or ought to last, which does not recognize that

Governments derive all their just power from the consent of the governed and that no right anywhere exists, to hand peoples about from sovereignty to sovereignty as if they were property.

Peoples and provinces are not to be bartered about from sovereignty to

sovereignty as if they were chattels and pawns in the game… Self-determination is not a mere phrase. It is an imperative principle of action, which state men will henceforth ignore at their peril.”

The right to self-determination became one of the pillars of the New International Order based on principles, not on power; based on the rule of law, not in particular interests. Since its creation the UN included in its articles the recognition of the right to self-determination of the peoples of the world, to the development of their own governments; to freely establish their political condition  and to provide for their economic, social and culture aspects. The right to self-determination is a fundamental right, without which it is impossible to fully enjoy all other rights.

The right of decolonization today or the “rule of law”  is found in the UN Charter, the several International Covenants  on Human rights , in multiple resolutions of the UN GA, being Res. 1514(XV) the Carta Magna on Decolonization. All these instruments reiterate as a principle the inadmissibility of foreign intervention and the protection of the peoples subjected to colonialism and the duty to guarantee the full enjoyment of the right to self-determination and independence.

International law expert Gross Espiell reminds us that under international law colonialism is an international crime typified as such. Therefore, it must be stressed that upon adopting Res. 1514(XV), all titles to territorial sovereignty  founded upon dominion are obsolete inasmuch they violate the principle of self-determination of the peoples subjected to colonial foreign domination. As a result all colonial titles  which result from the old and obsolete international law, have ceased to exist.

This is the applicable theory of law in questions of colonialism, however the “real politik” is another. If the UN were to truly enforce these principles, we wouldn’t have a Caribbean Sea fragmented and occupied by three European powers and one North American power.

In theory the legality of the claim to territorial titles of the so called” administering powers” which by itself is an euphemism for “imperial power”, cannot be sustained under any of the principles decreed by the UN; rather they would in fact be in flagrant violation of the same.

Under these principles there is no justification for the physical presence and occupation by foreign countries in the Caribbean and their intervention over Caribbean territories and waters.

There is nothing in the aforesaid mentioned principles that justify or allow for the UK suspending a constitution, demanding a new constitution and reserving for itself the power to approve it as in the case of Turks and Caico. Neither could there be a pretension of suspending the effectiveness of laws and decisions made by the legitimate representatives of the people of Turks and Caico and other British possessions. Direct Rule should be something left in the dust bins of the history books of the British Empire.

There is nothing in the aforesaid principles that justify or recognize the legality of the fragmentation of territories which by nature are small in two foreign jurisdictions, like in the case of Saint Martin, based on the claims to titles obtained in the past centuries which should not exist in the 21^st. Century.

In fact, when there is what appears to be some progress from colonial rule, like in the case of the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba, has a collateral benefit for the Dutch Kingdom of gaining control over 8,300 km. of territorial sea including exclusive maritime zones and economic zones.

The fragmentation of the Caribbean in four foreign jurisdictions, with four official languages imposed over the creole languages and different currencies, has delayed the natural cooperation and development of the region, Despite these difficulties the peoples of the Caribbean have had the resiliency to maintain a proud, beautiful, diverse and vibrant Caribbean culture and have managed to create important regional organizations like CARICOM and the OECS.

The fact that any peoples have to submit their constitution for approval of a foreign country is contrary to the right to self-determination. For a case on point, the U.S. Virgin Island has held five constitutional conventions and have been repeatedly rebuked by the U.S. Government.

In Puerto Rico, for a third time the U.S. President appointed a Task Force to issue a report on the question of the status of Puerto Rico. For the third time also the task force appointed by the US President, the last one by Pres. Obama, have no representation from the People of Puerto Rico. The three reports reiterate that the sovereignty of Puerto Rico lies in the US Congress. This is contrary to the representation that the US Gov. did to the international community in 1953, when they requested to have Puerto Rico taken out of the list of territories, because allegedly Puerto Rico had obtained self-government. The US Gov. then committed themselves to heed any requests that the people of Puerto Rico made to further develop self-government. Yet, despite the reiterated denunciations made before this committee of the US Gov.s’ refusal to act on Puerto Rico’s request for changes in the relationship, we find no recourse to bring the US Government into compliance.

 What mechanisms does the UN have in place to guarantee that the administering power comply with the obligations acquired with the international community? The attempts by a small and economically challenged country like Puerto Rico to request the revision of its situation before the UN GA is hardly feasible since it depends on the availability of a member country willing to confront the US Gov. What are the chances of having a country, other than our sister Republic of Cuba, to do that?

The March 11, 2011, Report of the US President Task Force on the Status of Puerto Rico appointed by Pres. Obama completely ignores international law and the 29 resolutions passed by this committee on the question of Puerto Rico; it denies recognition of our Puerto Rican nationality by denominating us as “U.S. Citizens that reside in the territory”. The US denies Puerto Rican nationals living outside Puerto Rico the right to vote in status consultation and rejects our right as peoples to convene ourselves in a status constitutional assembly. The report recommends that consultations be made in two plebiscites, the first one jus to ask whether we want to be part of the US or opting for a sovereign status, and a second plebiscite amongst the option recognized by them should the people decide to belong to the US. No prior declaration or definition is made of what the US would be willing to accept if the people voted in favor of belonging to the US. In fact the first plebiscite does not allow for other internationally recognized options such as free association or full integration. An incorporated territory can be maintained as such, for as long the US Congress wants with no guarantees of full citizenship and political rights.

As was the case in the Martinique and Guadeloupe referendums, the scare campaign has already started. The pro-statehood government of Puerto Rico and his followers are “warning” the population that choosing sovereignty entails the loss of millions of dollars in US funds. This is misleading to say the least, since the bulk of US revenues in Puerto Rico are payments to Social Security, Veterans pensions and federal employees pensions which are rights obtained by reason of the dues you have paid or the services you have rendered, they are no welfare or public benefit funds.

Sirs and madams, colonialism remains in place without any real attempt on the part of the administering powers to put an end to it. The European and US imperial powers  occupied our countries as a result of treatises amongst them, as war booty in the case of Puerto Rico in 1898 after the signing of the Treaty of Paris that ended the Hispanic American-Cuban War, or through purchase and sale amongst them legalized through treatises like the Treaty of Paris or the Treaty of Versailles. That the recognition of these titles be recognized as of today is no different than recognizing the slave owner’s titles of 19^th. Century. After all, colonialism is based in a racist conception of the world, is based in the belief that there are some privileged races, peoples and countries that because they happen to be white are better suited to govern.

But what it is really unconscionable is that the UN, having the instruments at hand that have effectively been used in the past to put an end to colonialism, as is mandated by Res. 1514(XV), is still groping with this problem. There you have the precedent of Namibia, amongst other. The UN put a stop to South Africa’s pretensions to integrate Namibia, because, an administering power that has been given a territory in trust to help in its development towards self-government does not have the right to claim over the territory. What, may I ask, is the difference between what South Africa pretended to do and what UK, the Dutch Kingdom, France and the US have been getting away with? Are not sophisticated manners of domination as in violation of the right to self-determination of peoples as the ones practiced by South Africa?

This Committee in compliance with the mandates of Res. 1514(XV) regarding the total eradication of colonialism should have as main goals and objectives the following:

1.     1. To declare null, void, obsolete and illegal all colonial titles obtained through military occupation, cession amongst foreign powers, purchase and sell amongst foreign powers, because such titles were  obtained without consulting the indigenous and native inhabitants and peoples and in violation of existing precepts of international law.

t    

     2. Apply the legal precedent established in the case of Namibia to all non-sell-governing territories and call upon the administering powers to prepare those territories for immediate independence.

3.      

      3. Call upon all administering powers to comply with paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of Res. 1514(XV) by transferring all powers to the territories, ceasing military intervention and respecting their territorial integrity.

4.     4. Establish accessible and viable mechanisms, not dependent on another member state willingness to help, for the peoples under colonialism in any form to enable them to request review by the UN GA of the agreements and commitments acquired with the international community.

4

          5. Forbid any referendum, plebiscite or consultation in the non-self-governing territories and in those who still have not obtained their independence, without proper UN supervision and approval.

6.     6. Organize and distribute immediately educational events and materials for all non-self-governing territories and in those who still have not obtained their independence, for the dissemination of information on technical and financial assistance programs and any other resources necessary to guarantee a swift and orderly transition to independence.

7.     7. Appoint a Negotiating Committee chaired by the President of this Committee to ensure that the administering power pay compensation to the peoples they have maintained under colonial rule and to that effect create a fund to guarantee and aid in a swift and orderly transition towards independence.

These I believe should be the true goals and aspirations of this Committee as mandated under Res. 1514(XV). Secretary General Ban Ki Moon asked from this Committee “vigor and creativity”. There is not much to be created, what is need are lots of vigor.

Gil Scott Heron joins the Ancestors

*****
Sign of the Ages

 Gil Scott Heron

It’s the sign of the ages

Markings on my mind

Man at the crossroads

At odds with an angry sky

There can be no salvation

There can be no rest

Until all old customs

Are put to the test

The gods are all angry

You hear from the breeze

As night slams like a hammer

And you drop to your knees

The questions can’t be answered

You’re always haunted by the past

The world’s full of children

Who grew up too fast

Yea, but where can you run

Since there a’int no world of your own

And you know that no one will ever miss you

When you’re finally gone

So you cry like a baby

Or you go out and get high

But there ain’t no peace on earth

Maybe peace when you die

Yea…

We will miss you, my brother

Rest well

Peace.

Dutch Minister Says Independence for Aruba, Curacao & Sint Maarten not far off

*****
Daily Herald

Dissolution of Kingdom is looming, says Donner

The last step of the "continuous dissolution" of the Dutch Kingdom, namely the complete independence of Aruba, Curaçao and St. Maarten, is not far off, if things progress the way they are now, according to Dutch Minister of Home Affairs and Kingdom Relations Piet Hein Donner.

Donner made his remarkable statement at a gathering of the Antillean Network Association VAN in Amsterdam Friday evening. Donner, who was the main speaker at the event that kicked off a weekend of activities themed "The Islands Adrift," explained that the process of continuous dissolution actually started in 1948.

The Round Table Conference in that year kicked off a process that led to Suriname's independence and a status apart for Aruba. With the dismantling of the Netherlands Antilles in October last year the last but one step was taken in the process of continuous dissolution.

"Only one step remains: the dissolution of the Kingdom ties and the complete independence of Aruba, Curaçao and St. Maarten. The Netherlands would remain a Caribbean country, the consequence of the decision to take up Bonaire, St. Eustatius and Saba into the Dutch Constellation. And that step is not too far if we continue in this manner," said Donner, who made clear that the Netherlands cannot take that step.

Donner's speech was remarkable because it was the first time that he openly spoke about the future of the Kingdom, indirectly giving his vision on the Kingdom, a position that the Dutch Second Chamber has been asking for several times. The Dutch Government is currently preparing an official vision on the Kingdom.

The fact that the question is posed whether the Kingdom has a shared future shows that this is not the case, said Donner. "We are not busy either with the question whether the provinces have a shared future."

Yet, the Netherlands has never really answered the question what it wants for the Kingdom. "The Kingdom was just there. It was the Netherlands and the former colonies were a Dutch responsibility. The Netherlands could and cannot unilaterally make them independent," he said.

Donner said the Kingdom was more than a commonwealth of independent states. The Kingdom consists of the countries of the Kingdom that look after their own affairs, care for the interests of the Kingdom based on equality and offer each other mutual assistance.

"But it concerns the past as long as the Kingdom is merely a legal tie and political guarantee. Than the Kingdom is only a result of responsibility and accountability of the Netherlands as a former colonial power. We are busy with the past as long as we only deal with the responsibilities and restrictions of the Kingdom. We are talking about the future when we speak of the possibilities of the Kingdom," said Donner.

The transformation of October 10, 2010 was especially a reaction to grievances and problems of the past. It wasn't based on a joint vision on a positive filling in and ambitions of the new situation. "That is worrisome because the Kingdom is not a goal on its own. Than we are busy with a renovation of a constellation of which we don't know whether it is worth the while to maintain it."

Donner said it was "high time" that the partners asked themselves the question what they wanted for the Kingdom. "We can continue by reproaching each other in a loud voice, but it will only restrict the options and speed up the moment of a definite bearing up," he said.

The Minister said there were three scenarios for the Kingdom. The first scenario was to continue on the current path whereby each of the countries would go their own way without making something good of the relations and with the Kingdom relations being little more than a legal tie.

Under the first option the Kingdom would mostly have a guarantee function with the Netherlands being responsible for integer and proper governments, a solid structure of law and order and the protection of human rights. "The Netherlands would be seen as the police officer who looks after law and order in the Caribbean part of the Kingdom," he said.

In the second scenario, partners would find a basis of joint interests and of own interests which are strengthened by cooperation. The third scenario is that the countries mostly focus on their own individual interests but that the cooperation strengthens their relation.

Donner didn't indicate a preference of any of the three scenarios, since it concerned a decision of all Kingdom partners. He said the "love and tie should come from two sides and has to be stable."

The Netherlands wants to keep the ties with the other countries of the Kingdom because it has an interest in maintaining and strengthening the Kingdom. He said it was a "misunderstanding" that especially Aruba, Curaçao and St. Maarten had an interest in continuing the current relations and the Netherlands didn't.

He pointed out that the Netherlands had a direct interest in stability and prosperity of the Dutch "public entities" Bonaire, St. Eustatius and Saba which can serve as a "showcase" for the Dutch and European private sector in its trade relations with South America. Furthermore, the strategic location of the Dutch Caribbean islands make them an important partner in the fight against organised crime in the region.

Donner said there was much to gain from good and close ties in the Kingdom. A prerequisite, however, is that each country sees it as its own interest and responsibility to make sure that there is proper governance, healthy government finances, integrity, justice and safety for its inhabitants.

"Own interest because citizens want to be governed in a proper, trustworthy and integer manner. Own interest also because legal security, safety and proper governance play a key role in the decision of companies to set up a business in a country," stated Donner.

Decolonisation in the Non-Independent Caribbean subject of high level academic discussions in Curacao

*****

Eminent scholars to examine status of non-independent Caribbean at the beginning of the Third International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism (2011-2020) adopted by the United Nations General Assembly

A high-level panel of Caribbean academics will explore the challenges faced by non-independent Caribbean territories during the 2011 session of the Caribbean Studies Association (CSA). The annual conference will convene from 30th May to 3rd June at the World Trade Center in Curacao, the former capital of the Netherlands Antilles before its dismantling in 2010 to become the third autonomous Caribbean country in the Kingdom of the Netherlands, along with Aruba and Sint Maarten.

Under the title "Unfinished Decolonization: Proposals and Uncertainties in the Non-Independent Territories of the Caribbean," panelists will present scholarly papers on the range of political status options available to the small island non self-governing territories, and will examine how present self-governing arrangements of independence, free association and integration actually operate in practice in the Caribbean and Pacific.

Specific attention will be paid to the present political dependency status of the six British dependent territories of the Caribbean/Atlantic region, in particular Bermuda, Turks and Caicos Islands, Cayman Islands Montserrat, British Virgin Islands and Anguilla. Additoinally, the U.S. dependent territories of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands will also be examined the panel of scholars.

The panel will be chaired by eminent professor of the University of Puerto Rico (UPR) Dr. Aaron Gamiel Ramos, who will also present a paper on “The Limits of Representation: Regional Cooperation Efforts of Non-Independent Territories.” Ramos has published widely on non-independent Caribbean issues, and co-edited with UPR Professor Dr. Angel Israel Rivera the seminal text, "Islands at the Crossroads: Politics in the Non-Independent Caribbean."

The role of the United Nations in the decolonisation process of Caribbean and Pacific island territories will be examined in a second paper, "An Assessment of the Implementation of the International Decolonisation Mandate", to be presented by the eminent decolonisation expert Dr. Carlyle Corbin, international advisor on governance, former US Virgin Islands minister for external affairs and United Nations expert. Corbin, who is the Executive Secretary of the Council of Presidents of the United Nations General Assembly (CPGA), will also make a presentation on Implementation of Decolonisation 2020 on a separate panel on "Identity in Non-Independent States."

A key paper on the changing dynamics in the French overseas departments entitled “The French Antilles: Historical Debates, Contemporary Challenges” will be presented by eminent professor Dr. Fred Reno, professor of the Universite des Antilles et de la Guyane in Guadeloupe.

Additional papers are also set for presentation under other panels of the conference. Accordingly, the panel on “Representation and Dutch Caribbean Sovereignty” will hear a presentation by eminent scholar Dr. Justin Daniel of the Universite des Antilles et de la Guyane in Martinique on “The Non-Independent Caribbean: Towards New Models of Governance.”

The Caribbean Studies Association (CSA) is an independent professional organization devoted to the promotion of Caribbean studies from a multidisciplinary, multicultural point of view. It is the primary association for scholars and practitioners working on the Caribbean Region (including Central America and the Caribbean Coast of South America). Its members come from the Caribbean Region, North America, South America, Central America, Europe and elsewhere. The CSA was founded in 1974 by 300 Caribbeanists and now has over 1100 members.

The focus of the CSA is on the Caribbean Basin which includes Central America, the Caribbean Coast of Mexico, as well as Venezuela, Colombia, Northeast Brazil and the three Guianas. The Association serves a critical function for scholars providing one of the only venues for persons working on the Caribbean to come together to share their work, to engage in collaborative endeavors, to exchange ideas, to meet each other, and to develop the field of Caribbean Studies.

Members of CSA have played leading roles in the Caribbean, most notably in public service and in academia. These include current and past service as leaders of governments, administrators in multilateral and bi-lateral regional organizations. Many current members serve in senior positions at Caribbean, North American, and European universities.

United Nations University Offers Internship Vacancies - 15 June 2011 deadline

*****

UNU-ONY Internship Vacancy

August 2011-January 2012

Apply Now
Deadline: Wednesday 15 June 2011

Dear Colleague,

The United Nations University Office at the United Nations in New York (UNU-ONY) is recruiting Junior Fellows for the August 2011-January 2012 session.

The title given to the Junior Fellows reflects a combination of academic excellence, professional aptitude and diligent work ethic exhibited by the members of the programme. Requirements and guidelines for application are found below. More information can also be found on the UNU-ONY website.

Please circulate this announcement to your students, colleagues and friends who may be interested in participating in the programme or in disseminating this great opportunity to young professionals.

The deadline for receiving applications is Wednesday, 15 June 2011. Please do not hesitate to consult the UNU website if you have any questions or comments.


With kind regards,
UNU-ONY Team
United Nations University Office at the UN, New York
2 UN Plaza, Room DC2-2060, New York, NY 10017
Tel.: 212-963-6387
Fax: 212-371-2144
Email: jpfony@unu.edu
Website: http://www.ony.unu.edu/

Rebuilding the Bermuda Economy - At the Crossroads of the Business Model

*****

  Rebuilding the Economy 

Walton Brown

Bermuda’s way out of this economic morass must be by way of a strong and genuine partnership between government and business. While government provides the framework and infrastructure for business to develop and companies provide the capital and employment to generate wealth, there are roadblocks along the way that must be cleared. Given the present circumstances, we must demonstrate a level of urgency in doing so.

It is true that Government consults widely, and often, with key business stakeholders to better discern their concerns and challenges. On the basis of these discussions, Government assesses current policy and reflects on what if any changes need to be introduced. Sounds like the perfect working relationship. The problem here is that industry does not consistently share with government the totality of its concerns; business leaders, however, do share their candid views with their peers and this information eventually gets into the public domain. The main reason business leaders are reticent about some of their deep concern on issues when their position conflicts with Government is that they want to be seen to be working with Government and not opposing policy. The unfortunate consequence is that some companies have quietly left the island and taken much needed jobs and expenditures. We need to clear this roadblock.

Another roadblock is the inevitable inertia spawned in government bureaucracies. How this comes about is simple enough to understand. Firstly, every department created in every Ministry has its own mandate and set of rules, policies and procedures. Secondly, unlike the private sector, there is no reward system for efficiency or productivity. The lazy worker is paid the same as the diligent and efficient government employee. This has created a set of conditions where many simple and routine decisions are unnecessarily delayed by months, in some cases years. Every month’s delay for a business creates more frustrated owners; it necessarily forces them to consider other options in other jurisdictions. When we have businesses ready to invest and to create jobs, we must ensure work permits, building permits, landing permits, occupation permits, fire permits and all the other permits needed are approved within a timeframe that values the importance of that business to the country. Some of us need to be reminded that it is the private sector and not Government that creates value and grows the GDP.

As companies seek new opportunities we need to assure them we value their business. There are a few things we can do in this respect. If a company is bringing a minimum size investment to the island (say $10 million) we should have a process in place a one-stop shop, if you will, where all of their requests from government can be handled by a single entity and processed expeditiously. Bermuda was once at a competitive disadvantage because of the time it took to incorporate a company. That was addressed by a sound working relationship between Government and the private sector. Let us apply this same approach with renewed vigour. A company, having invested millions of dollars, should not be told they cannot pick their own executive team. And if we do not allow them to, there are many other jurisdictions which will allow them. Preemptively, let me say there is no conflict between a policy ensuring qualified Bermudians be employed in their areas of competence and a company having an entitlement to select its key executive team.

We are at a crossroads. Bermuda’s business model once embraced our passive motto, “Whither the fates lead” but it is ill-suited for the present. We need to actively pursue strategies to bring back growth because with that growth will come renewed strength and greater opportunities for all of us

Turks & Caicos Islanders Reject British-drafted constitution

*****

Public rejects reforms proposed by British advisors

by Richard Green

fp Turks and Caicos

Frustrated Turks and Caicos Islanders who attended public meetings this week overwhelming rejected nearly all proposed changes to the U.K. overseas territory’s 2006 Constitution, many demanding that no changes be made.

However, it remains to be seen if the new coalition U.K. government will reverse its requirement that a new Constitution be in place before the government is returned to local rule. The current timetable is for the Privy Council to receive a new Constitution for approval in July.

Four representatives from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office got a raucous welcome May 16 from more than 200 people crammed into the Community Fellowship Centre on Leeward Highway on Providenciales.

“Every time I open my mouth, you shout me down,” FCO constitutional advisor Ian Hendry said at one point while trying to answer a question during the nearly four-hour public consultation.

Many speakers from all walks of life vented their frustration over British rule since the 2006 Constitution was suspended in 2009, even some who supported the action. They are upset that the FCO refused to include local politicians and Belongers in negotiations to draft changes to the Constitution, and they question whether public consultation will make any difference.

They are not encouraged by the fact that very few objections and suggestions given to Constitution advisor Kate Sullivan during her consultations made it into the March 4 draft now being considered.

Despite all the cheering, jeering and often off-topic comments and speeches at the Providenciales meeting, the FCO team got the message loud and clear that the people especially oppose increasing the power of the governor, changing the way to obtain Belongership and altering the method of electing members to the House of Assembly.

Some accused the former Gov. Richard Tauwhare and the FCO of being just as responsible for alleged corruption and problems as former ministers now under investigation. They questioned the wisdom of giving more power to governors, who come and go every three years and may not have the country’s best interests at heart.

The 2006 Constitution gave most power to local ministers, requiring the governor to go along with ministers in most cases. After Sir Robin Auld said in his 2009 Commission of Inquiry report that the Constitution need strengthening to prevent future problems, the U.K. government hired Sullivan to revise the 2006 Constitution to do just that.

Hendry negotiated with the former TCI government during the writing of the 2006 Constitution, which he believes is a progressive document that could have led to independence, but he said his marching orders come from the British government.

“Obviously, while the Turks and Caicos Islands are an overseas territory and not an independent state, then the British government can call the shots,” Hendry said.

More power is proposed for the governor “because the U.K. remains responsible for the territory, internationally and constitutionally in terms of answerability to the U.K. Parliament,” he said.

“Please do not overreact and assume that because there are these powers, that they will be used every day of the week,” Hendry said, pointing out that territory governors rarely overrule local governments.

Progressive National Party Leader Clayton Greene was among those at the Provo meeting who asked about the possibility of holding a referendum on changes to the Constitution.

Hendry said there have only been two national referenda in the U.K. and none in the TCI, but that decision would be up to U.K. ministers.

At May 17 meetings on Salt Cay and Grand Turk, Hendry and his team got similar objections.

Grand Turk residents were at times as vocal and boisterous as those on Providenciales, but some of them gave thoughtful criticism and suggestions to the team.

The main concern of a polite, orderly group on Salt Cay was representation — they want a minister from their tiny island of fewer than 100 people. They say they have been overlooked for many years in matters affecting their residents because of a lack of representation.

The proposed new election method would give one representative to each island and nine others elected at large countrywide, answering Salt Cay’s prayers. However, most objected to the complicated compensating voting system proposed for selecting the at-large members.

Hendry explained that the compensating voting system is used in London to elect its mayor and members of the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly.

Sullivan suggested using a mixed system to preserve the current, popular first past the post method to elect island representatives, including Salt Cay, he said. The compensating voting system for countrywide representatives is aimed at preventing one party from getting a large majority of seats with only a narrow margin of victory, which can happen in first past the post elections, he said.

Members of the Middle Caicos community were cordial to the panel, which said it had a productive two and a half hour discussion on similar topics.

While many opposed the suggested voting system, one resident explained the benefits it could offer the smaller communities such as those on Middle Caicos.

“Proportional voting has a large number of positive values in a small community,” she said, noting that during the last election only 52 percent of the electorate elected 13 out of 15 elected members of government. “Forty-eight percent of the electorate was not well represented by two members of government. So I would really ask people to be open to this idea of proportional voting to make sure you understand what it is.”

She said the six island representatives would be “fabulous” because it elects six people to government who are going to do nothing but putting forward what is best for their island.

“This is a radical departure and would add something to the House of Assembly and to the way government functions to help move us away from corruption … doing things under the table.”

FCO Deputy Director of Overseas Territories Helen Nellthorp responded positively, saying, “These are drafts, these are proposals, but these are the sorts of things we would want you to be talking about locally and deciding what you want these governance principles to be.”

After several meetings, the team said it had heard clearly the strong feelings that the draft Constitution has created, and the team will be reporting this quickly and accurately to Overseas Territories Minister Henry Bellingham. “We are already giving consideration to possible changes to the draft to present to the minister,” Nellthorp said.

“We hope everyone will understand that our work and the work of Kate Sullivan has been to ensure that TCI does not return to the difficult times of recent years. We want to work together to help reach the milestones needed to return to elected government.

“We will report faithfully all of these points, and more, back to ministers in London.”

Anguilla CM Assures Support for Financial Sector

*****

CM Assures Financial Association Of Government's Support

The Anguillian

Chief Minister and Minister of Finance, Hubert Hughes, is of the view that the offshore financial industry can derive significant benefits for the Government and people of Anguilla. He made the point, however, that in order to accomplish this, it was necessary for Government to support the initiatives of the private sector Financial Services Association and work in a harmonious relationship with the body.

The Anguilla Government leader made the comments in a keynote address to a Financial Services Strategy Planning Conference at Paradise Cove Hotel on Friday, May 6. The conference, involving financial services personnel in the public and private sectors, was organised mainly by Anguilla Finance Ltd, a company aimed at marketing the island’s financial services, whose Chief Executive Officer is Stephen Garlick.

“I would admonish the industry to be vigilant; to continue to work closely with Government as a partner,” the Chief Minister went on. “Together, we can really, for the first time in our history, create the jobs and the revenue stream as a sustainable industry, but we must work together in order to achieve that end.

“It is accepted that a well-regulated industry can only result in prosperity but one must be mindful …that we can regulate the industry out of existence. There must be a balance and this has been and continues to be the challenge. We must also recognise that there are many countries competing for this business.”

Mr. Hughes hoped that the private sector financial services industry leaders, with whom the Government was working, would be able to produce a marketing budget and an accompanying marketing plan for consideration. “This Government is serious about moving forward with this industry so that it can derive all it can for the people of Anguilla,” he stated. “We will continue to do so even though the portfolio is not truly carried by the Minister of Finance, an anomaly that we must fix through constitutional reform.”

The Chief Minister thanked Anguilla Finance Ltd., the company he said was charged with marketing the Anguilla jurisdiction, for putting on the event and working so hard to move the island’s financial services agenda forward. “This will undoubtedly benefit the Government and people of Anguilla,” he stressed. “The private sector representatives have put their money where their mouths are, as all the costs have been met by their professional services providers in Anguilla. Government must do its part to support them both with legislation and marketing dollars because a lot of service providers are talking about cutting back or closing down. We need to ‘stop the slide and grow the pile’ and the only way to do so is to do what my Government has decided to do and, that is, to work with them and invest with them. In order to make money, we must spend money.”

Mr. Hughes saw offshore financial services as being second to the island’s tourism industry in which all the stakeholders had worked tirelessly together to produce a world leading asset. “The financial services industry must do the same,” he added. “All the stakeholders both here, and globally, must form themselves together, making the best use of best practice,…to achieve a product and a level of service that can surpass all jurisdictions that are household names.”

Mr. Garlick was pleased with the turnout of Government and financial services officials and outlined some of the proposals of his company.  He issued a booklet entitled, “Anguilla Finance: Working Together for the Common Good,” in which he stated that his company’s proposal was to be the marketing entity for the island’s financial services community as a whole.

Mr. Garlick listed various steps to be taken to significantly develop the financial services industry. They included looking for new markets; creating unique selling propositions; utilisingall the resources available to British Overseas Territories; creating a user-friendly and manageable website to allow members to post press releases, articles and brochures; working with British and Anguillian Government bodies;reviewing target markets and databases; organising events such as trade shows; speaking and sponsorship opportunities; and working closely with Chambers of Commerce, Embassies and Consulates in Anguilla, the Caribbean and worldwide.

Mr. Garlick noted that there must be a review of the cost effectiveness of all activities in order to move forward. This included a review of itemised expenditure; client satisfaction surveys; a review of closed deals and revenue generation.

President of the Anguilla Financial Services Association, Palmavon Webster, expressed gratitude to the Chief Minister for pledging Government’s support including the funding of part of the marketing programme.

She said all stakeholders had a significant role to play in the interest of Anguilla and its people. According to her, it was not about playing second fiddle to the tourism industry but, like the Cayman Islands, Bermuda and the BVI, Anguilla could equally distinguish itself in the development of its financial services.

Ms. Webster congratulated Anguilla Finance Ltd for taking the lead in marketing the industry. She underscored the Chief Minister’s desire to see the offshore financial services industry developed to a point where it would result in increased employment for Anguillians and financial business for the island’s economy. “What we need to achieve our goals, is to band together,” she added.” We can follow the lead of the tourist industry and do it better. We must not be complacent…I think we have an incredible opportunity to go forward now in a very logical and methodical way.”

Other speakers were Registrar of Commercial Activities, Lanston Connor whose topic was Working together for the Common Good; Paul T. Mason who spoke on The Growing Need for a Real Presence; John J. Koresko who gave an American view on the subject: How to make Anguilla an attractive destination given the current administration’s attitude to offshore financial centres; Martin Evenleigh, Chairman of Altlas Insurance Management whose topic was: Captive Insurance: What clients require from a jurisdiction; and Peter Reichenstein who spoke on Foundations: A legislative process case history.

PM of Sint Maarten Responds to Dutch MP's 'insalubrious' comments

*****

Sarah rejects the insalubrious name calling by Dutch MPs

*****

Daily Herald

PHILIPSBURG--"It is with disbelief that the Government of St. Maarten took note of the personal name-calling by some members of the Dutch Parliament directed to the Prime Minister and Vice Prime Minister of the country St. Maarten," said Prime Minister Sarah Wescot-Williams on Thursday.

She said government had become accustomed to the oftentimes critical remarks from members of the Dutch Parliament's Second Chamber, but a few members had "clearly overstepped the boundaries of decency," during the May 18 meeting.

"Little mafia boss, Mr. Ten Per Cent." That is how Second Chamber Member of Parliament Ronald van Raak of the Socialist Party (SP) referred to Deputy Prime Minister Theo Heyliger at the meeting in The Hague. And Member of Parliament Eric Lucassen of the Party for Freedom PVV referred to Wescot-Williams as a "conceited diva."

Wescot-Williams expressed appreciation for the handling of the issue by Dutch Minister for Home Affairs and Kingdom Relations Piet Donner and Acting Chairman of the Second Chamber's Permanent Committee for Kingdom Relations Jeroen Recourt, but condemned the statements by members Van Raak and Lucassen in the strongest possible manner.

Donner said, "That doesn't fit in the manner we talk about other governments and ministers. It is not conducive to a fruitful cooperation." He added that he had "felt the urge to leave the room" while Van Raak spoke.

It is "a public secret" that some members of the Second Chamber had opposed St. Maarten's new status up to "the very end," the prime minister said. "No reason, however, for the disrespectful display by these same members. Let it be made abundantly clear that the Parliament to whom the government of country St. Maarten is accountable sits in Philipsburg.

Wescot-Williams said, "Dutch legislation, like our own legislation, describes the political relationship between the Parliament and the government. Now maybe, locally we make too much fuss about what individual members of Parliament say about St. Maarten. Perhaps even there are just a regular few who make the St. Maarten dossier their preferred pastime."

"However, it needs to be said and it needs to be said clearly that the Dutch Parliament's concern and supervision, if you wish, is on the Dutch government and these direct and subtle threats towards St. Maarten serve no purpose and have no place in our constitutional system."

The counterpart of the Dutch Parliament is the Parliament of St. Maarten, as far as St. Maarten is concerned, and not because St. Maarten is now a country the Dutch MPs have been granted a new responsibility for the country, she added.

"Let's keep the constitutional lines clear. In fact, not any more than any other citizen of the Kingdom, the members of the Dutch Parliament can ask any question they feel like, but they should not be showering their Minister of Kingdom Relations or any other minister with questions that regard the internal workings of the governments of the other countries in the Kingdom. If we overstep our bounds in the area of foreign relations and international relationships, then by all means. If we engage in actions that compromise the interests of the Kingdom, then by all means."

Wescot-Williams continued, "But someone would need to explain us the Dutch Parliament's role with respect to St. Maarten's budget and St. Maarten government-owned companies. Better yet, explain the Parliament's role regarding a meeting between the government of St. Maarten and the CFT [Committee for Financial Supervision-Ed.]."

Government has gone "to great lengths" to establish institutions to provide the necessary checks and balances, not because the Dutch Parliament said so, but because it is good for St. Maarten.

"And mind you, if the criticism and the subtle threats are levelled with the objective of helping find solutions for whatever perceived misgivings, then again, by all means. Until then, we demand respect from members of the Dutch Chamber and in fact from all partners in the Kingdom," she said.

.

St. Martin Movement for Advancement of the People (MAP) Readies for elections

*****

Mussington to head MAP list in 2012

Daily Herald

MARIGOT--Opposition Councillor Louis Mussington will head the list of the Movement for the Advancement of the People (MAP) in the 2012 Territorial Council elections, he confirmed to the press this week. Currently the group is sending out questionnaires to the public to get feedback on the critical issues important to them.

"We're in the process of putting the best political platform possible together but we want to involve the people in the survey," he said. "We are hoping the questions we have asked in the questionnaire will be responded to in a constructive manner. The feedback will help us to shape our ideas and policies. We want to be sure our platform reflects the concerns and aspirations of the people, and not the other way around by us pretending to know it all."

He added this would also be achieved by visiting all the districts and listening to the concerns of the population and having two-way dialogue.

"We want to get rid of the old style politics. It's got to be a partnership with the people. We want to be able to speak boldly and forcefully to the authorities, whoever they may be in Paris or St. Martin, on behalf of the people because we will know what is troubling them. So we encourage the people to work along with us."

Mussington indicated the opinions of everyone are welcome, not only from those sympathetic to the MAP cause. Not only will MAP members be in the field visiting the districts but there will be a website as well.

"We hope the website will be ready in a couple of weeks at which time we will start the field trips. The people can look out for us in all the relevant districts. These will be fruitful exchanges to serve the general interest. It's very critical people get involved because the current situation is a total disaster, both from an economic and social perspective."

MAP will begin analysing and gauging the response to the survey from the beginning of July.

Mussington has been in politics for thirteen years. He has served as General Councillor, Regional Councillor, and substitute to President of the Regional Council Victorin Lurel, and attended many seminars in Paris.

"I have the intellectual and spiritual experience to take on this challenge," he said.

Palau President Continues Monthly College Lectures

*****
President Toribiong talks on historical, political development of Palau

Island Times

President Toribiong this week will resume his lectures at Palau Community College on the historical and political development of Palau.

The (most recent) lecture...was scheduled for Thursday, May 12, starting at 6:30 pm. The president discuss(ed) the Compact of Free Association between the Republic of Palau and the United States. PCC Dean of Continuing Education Willy Wally said the lectures have become popular with students and many look forward to the monthly events. PCC President Dr. Patrick Tellei is a regular attendee and the lectures also draw teachers, students and the general public.

Before assuming the presidency in January 2009, Toribiong was a successful attorney, and also served in various capacities throughout his more than three decades of professional life here in Palau and Micronesia. He is a former lawmaker, one of the authors of the Palau Constitution and a member of the two Constitutional Conventions.

His long and successful career, both privately and publicly, has given him many perspectives on Palau’s evolvement from its Trust Territory days to today’s modern elected government.

The public is invited to attend the lectures, which are free and held at the former PCC library, now the assembly hall.