Cayman Islands 'tenuous grip on self-governance"

Who rules?

Posted By: Tina Trumbach

The past week has shown us that the Cayman Islands has a more tenuous grip on self governance than we’d previously believed.

Given the modernised 2009 Constitution, most Caymanians have been lulled into a sense of security that despite being a British Overseas Territory (BOT), we had the right to rule our own destiny.

However, with calls for direct rule coming from the UK’s (United Kingdom) Opposition Leader it quickly became clear to us all that this was not outside of the realm of possibility.

We have only to look at our fellow BOT the Turks and Caicos Islands to see that it is a potential reality that Britain can hold over our heads if we don’t fall into line.

Although Prime Minister David Cameron pushed aside Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn’s comments regarding the spectre of direct rule, the damage to our psyches had already been done.

Most of us grew up blithely accepting that our elected representatives ran the country while the Governor of the day merely represented the UK on our shores.

After all, the UK is supposed to be responsible only for our national security and foreign affairs.

However, recent events and issues have pointed to a far different reality.

Look at the issue of a public registry of beneficial ownership. Our local leaders have fought this tooth and nail over the past three years, finally coming to a compromise announced this week. However, despite this agreement Premier Hon Alden McLaughlin has warned that the battle is far from over. David Cameron continues to push for a public register.

And although Mr Cameron has denied the possibility of imposing direct rule if we do not comply, we are certain that great pressure will be brought to bear. How long will we be able to withstand it?

Beyond the issue of beneficial ownership, we also have the social and cultural one of same-sex marriage. While this publication has not taken a public stance on the issue, we are keenly aware that there is strong opposition to the very idea among the local population.

Indeed, two elected representatives resigned from the ruling government over the issue late last year. And opinion against recognising same-sex marriages locally has only solidified since then, with the Cayman Ministers Association taking a pledge to uphold traditional marriage.

While any pressure from the UK on this issue has been more subtle than that exerted over beneficial ownership, the pressure is still there.

A spokesperson for James Duddridge, the UK Minister for the Overseas Territories and Africa, said “We continue to encourage all the Overseas Territories to respect human rights in their widest meaning and to embrace policies of inclusiveness.”

This was in relation to a previous statement by Mr Duddridge in the UK Parliament on the Cayman Islands position on “equal marriage” that became a point of contention with Dr Leonardo Raznovich – who is currently appealing the Immigration Appeals Tribunal’s decision not to approve his application to be added as a dependent to his partner’s work permit by virtue of their marriage in another jurisdiction.

The Premier is trying to compromise on this issue as well. He has pledged to amend the Immigration Law regulations to allow same-sex and common law spouses as work permit dependents. It is his hope that this will stem the tide, and prevent the Cayman Islands from being forced to recognise same-sex unions by the UK.

This publication has not taken a position with regard to same-sex marriage, what we are taking a position on is internal self-governance.

Cayman’s elected representatives must have the final say on issues that relate to our internal affairs. Otherwise, what is the value of our democracy? And without this assurance, is the 2009 Constitution worth the paper it is written on?

We do not see how the issue of same-sex marriage is related to good governance, our national security or our foreign affairs – the only areas which the UK is supposed to have control over.

Aren’t we supposed to have governance over issues that relate solely to our community and society? Culturally, we would hazard a well-educated guess that most Caymanians are against same-sex marriage. If it came to a point that we were being forced to adopt this, wouldn’t it have to go to referendum?

After all, as drafted, the definition of marriage in the Cayman Islands is established in our Constitution of 2009. The provisions of that document had to go to a referendum to be approved by the people, so shouldn’t changing this aspect have to go to a vote as well?

And should the Caymanian people vote “No” what would the UK response be? Would our Constitution be revoked and we be placed under direct rule for disagreeing with a social and cultural construct?

Please note, as we have said repeatedly, this is not a position on same-sex marriage. This is a genuine question on the Cayman Islands’ rights and abilities to govern, control and manage our own internal affairs.

If we can be threatened, coerced and bullied on beneficial ownership, will we experience the same on this and any other issue that we disagree with the UK on?

USVI Sports Autonomy provides participation in Olympics

V.I. OLYMPIC COMMITTEE DESCRIBES NEWLY UNVEILED LOGO AS ‘SYMBOL OF HOPE AND ASPIRATION’

ST. THOMAS — Governor Kenneth Mapp on Tuesday expressed his strong support for the Virgin Islands Olympic Team at a special Government House event to unveil its 50th anniversary logo. Preparations are now underway for the Summer Games in Rio De Janeiro, Brazil, where the new insignia will serve to proudly identify the territory’s athletes and supporters.

The territory is celebrating a half century of participation in the Olympics and a new logo design was created by the V.I. Olympic Committee in order to commemorate this special anniversary. Described as a stylized image of a colorful bird in upward flight, it’s meant to convey hope and aspiration.

READ THE FULL STORY HERE .

Canadian party wants Turks and Caicos Islands as a new province

Would such a political transition be simply a shift of the colony from a distant Commonwealth colonial power (United Kingdom) to a geographically closer one (Canada)? Or would this constitute a genuine progression from the present British colonial status to a political arrangement where the province would actually be integrated into Canada under equal terms, and where the people of the Islands would have full political, economic and social rights as other Canadian citizens - unlike the absence of these rights under the present British dependency status? Most importantly, would the international right to self-determination for the people of the colony be respected so that such a transfer would be only as a result of the will of the people? And of course, if the people of the territory express their desire for such a change, would their interest be respected?The words of Frederick Douglass are instructive:

 "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never has, and it never will."  OTR

 ________________

Washington Post

Canada’s strange quest for its own Hawaii

By Ishaan Tharoor

On the face of it, Canada and the Turks and Caicos Islands do not have much in common.

One country is a continental behemoth of snow-capped mountains, ice-clogged bays and frost-covered plains. The other is a small cluster of sun-kissed islands and not even a country at all, but rather a territory still under the suzerainty of the British crown.

But they are united by a curious dream--that the Caribbean archipelago may one day actually join Canada as the North American nation's newest province.

READ THE FULL STORY HERE .

Cayman Premier calls for transfer of police to elected government

UK should hand police over to Cayman government

Cayman News Service.com

Premier Alden McLaughlin speaking on Radio Cayman Monday, 11 April 2016

(CNS): The premier believes the United Kingdom would be better off and the Cayman Islands would be further ahead if the Foreign and Commonwealth Office relinquished control of national security and the management of the police service to the Cayman government via a police authority. Speaking on Radio Cayman, Alden McLaughlin said the current arrangement was not working and has become extremely political, even though the politicians have no say at all in the management of the RCIPS. He also criticised the National Security Council, which, he said, was not functioning as it was envisaged during the 2009 constitutional talks.

“The UK are crazy having responsibility here for national security … It would be far better if the people could hold me or another elected member responsible,” the premier said, noting that over the last decade or so Cayman had hounded four police commissioners out of office because the post has “become so political”.

The premier was speaking about the current arrangements within the constitution regarding the police and crime during his appearance Monday on Radio Cayman’s morning show, For the Record, with Orrett Connor.

In light of the recent resignation of Police Commissioner David Baines, the perceived rise in crime and the pressure from the opposition for an entire review of the police service, McLaughlin raised his concerns about the motion that was filed by the opposition members calling for a no confidence debate in the RCIPS. He said he supported a review of the governance and management structure of the service but thought the motion was irresponsible as it was seeking a declaration that parliament has no confidence in all of the police officers, which was wrong.

Talking about the best way to address the police management, McLaughlin said he still believed, as he had during the talks with the UK over the 2009 constitution, that Cayman needed a local police authority to take control locally. He said that during those talks the idea was discussed with the UK, but with Opposition Leader Mckeeva Bush and his UDP team at the time opposed to it, the UK would not agree and retained the responsibility of national security with the governor.

The only local responsibility for the Royal Cayman Islands Police Service is its budget, which is in the hands of the home affairs ministry, now led by McLaughlin. The creation of a National Security Council was supposed to give the elected arm more say in policy, but noting that everything to do with police policy remains with the governor, McLaughlin said the NSC did not “function the way it should”.

However, he said the public still looks to the politicians for answers, even though they are not responsible and can do very little to influence what happens with the police.

“The construct does not work and the UK would be well advised to agree to allow a police authority,” he said. “Cayman, the UK and the governor will all be better off if we had a police authority responsible for the police service and the commissioner, instead of the post being line managed by the governor.”

Concerned that it will become increasingly difficult to fill the post of commissioner because of the strength of public feeling that there should be more local control over the police, he said that management of the police had become a “poisoned chalice” but one that he would take on nonentheless, as it “was critical to Cayman”. He pointed out that Cayman had enjoyed a long, peaceful history and when one heard of three armed robberies in one weekend, “those things are chilling”.

Welcoming the discussion and debate, which is now expected to take place in the Legislative Assembly on Thursday, 28 April, McLaughlin said he was happy to debate the issues but was concerned that the motion as it stands now, which calls for a declaration of no confidence in the entire police service, will not improve what is already a difficult situation.

U.S. bill would remove financial management from Puerto Rico

U.S. House Natural Resources Committee 

Releases Puerto Rico Legislation 

By Eva Lloréns Vélez 

on April 12, 2016

ShareTweetShareShareShare

SAN JUAN – The U.S. House Committee on Natural Resources released Tuesday H.R. 4900, the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act (PROMESA), which if passed as is will impose a seven-member financial oversight board over Puerto Rico that would be appointed by the president and will have broad encompassing powers over the island.

The Financial Oversight & Management Board’s members would be selected from a list of candidates submitted by the U.S. House speaker, Senate majority leader, and minority leaders of the House and Senate. The board, which will have offices in Puerto Rico and anywhere else needed, will appoint an executive director.

The governor of Puerto Rico would be an ex-oficio member without voting powers.

READ THE FULL REPORT HERE .

******

The United States Must Relinquish Puerto Rico

Compañeros Unidos para la Descolonización de Puerto Rico: Cita Patriótica ONU Junio 2012

This year, 2016, marks a new era in Caribbean colonialism.

The US Congress is preparing a "Financial Control Authority," which will supervise the finances of the entire government of Puerto Rico -- its legislature and courts, public authorities, pension system and all leases, union contracts and collective bargaining agreements. The authority will also restructure the entire public workforce (including teachers and police), freeze public pensions and ensure "the payment of debt obligations." Then it will issue its own debt, spend the funds as it sees fit and leave Puerto Rico to pay the bill.

Congress can veto any law passed in Puerto Rico

The authority will also have prosecutorial powers. It will be empowered to "conduct necessary investigations" into the government of Puerto Rico, or in other words, be empowered to hold hearings, secure government records, demand evidence, take testimony, subpoena witnesses and administer oaths -- under penalty of perjury -- to all witnesses.

Any witness who fails to appear or to supply information will be subject to criminal prosecution and removal from office. This includes any elected official on the island: even the governor and attorney general.

All of these powers are enumerated in the 157-page Senate Bill 2381, also known as the "Puerto Rico Assistance Act of 2015," which is currently under review in the US Senate.

Read the full article in: Compañeros Unidos para la Descolonización de Puerto Rico: Cita Patriótica ONU Junio 2012 

DUTCH ADMIT SPYING ON BONAIRE POLITICIAN JOPIE ABRAHAM

 by Janene Pieters

nltimes.nl

Intelligence service AIVD unjustly collected information on Bonaire former minister and deputy Jopie Abraham while he was negotiating Bonaire joining the Netherlands, Minister Ronald Plasterk of Home Affairs admitted in a letter to Abraham, NRC reports. 

(Bonaire became a Dutch 'public entity' under partial integratiion. A subsequent referendum on the island rejected the status after the five year period ending in 2015 - OTR)  

The CTIVD, the committee that oversees and supervises the intelligence services in the Netherlands, launched an investigation after Abraham filed a complaint last year. The complaint regarded the AIVD’s actions between 2005 and 2010. Abraham believes that the AIVD spied on Bonaire politicians while they negotiated with the Dutch government on joining the Netherlands Bonaire became part of the Netherlands in 2010.

According to Plasterk, the CTIVD advised him to declare Abraham’s complaint “partly justified and partly unfounded”. The reasons behind this advice are confidential. Plasterk states that the CTIVD found the AIVD’s actions “largely just”. “However, in respect of a short period, the CTIVD came to the conclusion that no investigation should have been carried out, so that part of the investigation is unlawful.” the Minister wrote to Abraham.

Exactly why the investigation was unlawful during that “short period”, the Minister does not say. But he does add that “measures” were now taken to prevent similar circumstances in the future.

****************************

Jopie Abraham was unlawfully spied on

The Daily Herald

Sint Maarten

THE HAGUE--The Dutch intelligence and security service AIVD acted partially on illegal grounds when it gathered information on the now retired Bonaire politician Jopie Abraham in the period 2005-2010, concluded the Committee of Supervision on the Intelligence and Security Agencies CTIVD recently.

The Dutch newspaper NRC revealed on Friday that Minister of Home Affairs and Kingdom Relations Ronald Plasterk sent a letter to Abraham of the Bonaire Democratic Party PDB on Tuesday in which he informed the former Minister of the Netherlands Antilles, and Commissioner and Member of the Island Council of Bonaire, of the results of the investigation by the CTIVD.

Abraham had filed a formal complaint in August and September 2015 against the conduct of the AIVD in the period January 2005 to October 2010. Abraham accused the AIVD of spying on Bonaire politicians during the negotiations with the Dutch Government in the process to dismantle the Netherlands Antilles and to make Bonaire part of the Netherlands. 

Plasterk’s letter dated March 29, 2016, a copy of which has been supplied to The Daily Herald, stated that the CTIVD had advised to declare Abraham’s complaint “partially founded” and “partially unfounded.”

However, the Minister couldn’t supply the motivation of the CTIVD because the committee’s report is filed as classified. The law states that data that can give an indication as to the identity of a source, an ongoing investigation or investigation method cannot be made public. As such the CTIVD report will remain classified. “I cannot send you the report,” Plasterk informed Abraham.

The Minister stated that he was unable to divulge whether the AIVD investigation, which he said was based on its legal task description, was carried out in the Netherlands or outside. “I can also not provide information on the way the investigation was carried out.”

Plasterk remained unclear as to the period that the AIVD investigation covered. However, the CTIVD concluded that no investigation by the AIVD during a “short period,” and as such this part of the investigation should be considered “illegal.”

In concluding, Plasterk stated that Abraham’s complaint for the largest part of the period in question was unfounded. This means, explained the Minister, “that in this period no investigation was carried out of your person, be it that this investigation largely took place legally.” 

Plasterk stated that “measures” were taken in the meantime. He pointed out to Abraham that the latter had the right to turn to the National Ombudsman regarding the handling of his complaint. When contacted by The Daily Herald for a reaction, Abraham responded that at this moment he had no comment as he was considering what his possible next step would be.

Abraham did supply his March 17, 2016 letter to Plasterk in which he urged the Minister to immediately respond to his complaint. “The handling of my complaint is starting to turn into a comedy,” stated the retired Bonaire politician.

In his letter, Abraham pointed out that in January he was informed by the CTIVD that its advice had been forwarded to the Minister. “It is now nine weeks later, and you repeatedly ask for postponement. In February you again ask for a postponement of four weeks. This was five weeks ago, and still I haven’t received a reaction,” stated an obviously irate Abraham. 

Abraham’s struggle to get more information about his suspicions that he had been the subject of investigation dates back to September 2014, when requested to see his AIVD dossier. He received confirmation from Plasterk that there was information on him at the AIVD, but that this could not be supplied to him.

Abraham filed a complaint, and was able to elucidate on his grievances during a hearing with the AIVD in May 2015. In July 2015, Plasterk again refused Abraham to see his AIVD dossier, for “reasons of national security.” Initially, Plasterk refused to take Abraham’s complaint about the working method of the AIVD into consideration. This decision was retracted shortly after. A hearing with the CTIVD took place in October 2015.

In 2013, the NRC newspaper disclosed that the AIVD from 2005 to 2010 had spied on several Bonaire politicians: Ramonsito Booi and Burney El Hage, both of the UPB party, and Abraham.

NRC reported that it concerned an illegal operation which was kept secret from the then Netherlands Antilles Government. It turned out that the AIVD didn’t have the required permission of the Prime Minister of the Netherlands Antilles at the time, Emily de Jongh-Elhage.

Nos Ke Boneiru of Bonaire rejects participation in Dutch referendum on EU-Ukraine Association Agreement

(Translations below)

James Fines

Nos Ke Boneiru Bek  

Letter To: The Minister of the Interior 

and Kingdom Relations, R.H.A. Plasterk

and to the

gezaghebber di Bonaire, E. E. Rijna

Kalendijk, 4 april 2016

Tema: invitashon pa 1e referendum konsultativo riba diarason 6 april 2016

Apresiabel senjoresnan,

Segun boso kampanja di informashon nos a konstata ku boso ta invita e poblashon di Karibe Hulandes pa partisipa na un referendum konsultativo riba 6 april benidero riba  “lei di aprobashon di akuerdo di asosashon entre Komunidat Oropeo i Oekraine” Pa e referendum aki boso servisio a parti karchi di vota bao di e poblashon Boneriano ku e intenshon ku e poblashon pa bai vota riba 6 april benidero ku si nan ta di akuerdo o kontra e lei aki.

En konekshon ku ariba menshona nos lo kier trese lo siguiente na boso atenshon:

Ta ironiko ku boso ta invita e poblashon Boneriano ku korto tempu pasa, 18 desember ultimo, den un referendum jama pa nos representashon di pueblo, esnan demokratiko skohe pa e pueblo Boneriano, nos raad, e referendum tabata “riba e posishon estatal di Boneiru”i ku nan ta “eens o kontra e kontenido ku a wordu duna na laso direkto ku Hulanda” na 10-10-10 di aktual ilegal strukturaestatal, e islan BES su integrashon-partial-den konstealshon Hulandes, i ku a wordu rechasa (5040= 65% No-kontra-voto).                                                                              

Mesun resultado tabatin ku e referendum di St Eustatius riba 17 desember 2014, kaminda na tambe ja kaba a rechasa e laso aktual ku Hulanda i a skohe pa un proseso-di-autonomia o gobernashon propio.

Ta inkonprendibel kon boso komo gobernantenan responsabel i kontra boso mes akuerdonan internashonal i kontra lei internashonal i e fundamento legal di nos estado di derecho, e bos di e pueblo Boneriano i di e pueblo si Sint Eustatius, ta neglisha e rechaso legitimo i boso okupashon i administrashon ilegal di e pueblonan humilde aki i ta presenta un otro stunt demokratiko i kier enbolbi o maniobra nos den boso proseso demokratiko Hulandes-Oropeo. 

Por ta boso ta di opinion pa den futuro bagaletisa i overrule e bos demokratiko di e pueblonan aki dor di e derecho di vota aki? Pues ku nos por a partisipa den boso proseso i mekanismo demokratiko, boso referendum-konsulktativo?

Pa medio di esaki ami ta deklara ofisialmente di no ta parisipa den boso referendum Oropeo-Hulandes pasobra ami segun fundamento legal internashonal ta pertenese na e isla o teritorio i pueblo Boneiru komo parti di Reino Hulandes i no ta pertenese na teritorio i pueblo Hulandes na Oropa ku tambe ta pertenese na Reino Hulandes i ta wordu goberna pa 1ste i 2de Kamer.

Pero boso ta duna nos e oportunidat ku refrendum aki si pa ilustra o kompara e situashon politiko entre Okraina -Krimea i esun Hulanda -Boneiru.

Pa nos komparabel kaminda boso kontra boso mesun akuerdonan i lei internashonal bao di intimidashon abierto i publiko di nos gobernantenan a forsa nos den e struktura aki i anexa e teritorionan di islanan-BES, pues Boneiru riba 10-10-10.                                                             

Un biaha mas nos kier menshona ku boso a hasi e pueblonan humilde di Boneiru i Sint Eustatius hopi infelis desde 10-10-10 i ku boso tin ku realisa ku esaki mester stop i ku boso mester respeta i juda realisa e deseo di e pueblonan aki.

Na final nos kier mustra boso riba un investigashon di boso mes ekspertonan, esaki los for di e raport-Spies ku a pone lus riba e BES-pesadia i a konklui su frakaso kompleto, ku boso Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde (KITLV) su investigashon riba e pregunta di boso representashon i presensia Hulandes riba Boneiru, ku 73% di e poblashon Boneriano ta negativo riba esaki i ku esaki ta prinisipalmente dor di e aktual relashon konstitushonal-estatal ku Hulanda. 

Pues nos konseho na boso ta pa respeta e bos di e pueblo Boneriano, e referendum di 18 desember 2015 i e diferente investigashonan ku ta papia palabra kla i pone komienso na e proseso pa garantisa nos derechonan di autodeterminashon, de-kolonisashon i derechonan humano i juda nos re-establese i realisa esakinan. Pues retrosede boso aktual maneho ku ta indika klaramente riba re-populashon i neokolonisashon Hulandes di e humilde pueblo Boneriano.

Atentamente,

James Finies, Nos Ke Boneiru Bek

_____

To: The Minister of the Interior and Kingdom Relations, R.H.A. Plasterk The Governor of Bonaire, E. E. Rijna

Kale Dijk, April 4, 2016

Subject: Call for 1st consultative referendum on Wednesday, April 6th, 2016

Dear Sirs,

According to your information campaign we have observed that the invites the people of the Caribbean Netherlands to participate in an advisory referendum on 6 April, the "Law for approval of the Association Agreement between the EU and Ukraine" This referendum has your service voting passes distributed among the population of Bonaire with the intention that the population will vote on April 6 as whether they are for or against.

In connection with the above, we bring the following to your attention:

It is extremely ironic that you Bonairean people invite to recently, on 18 December in our representative democracy, our island council voted referendum "on the constitutional position of Bonaire" and whether they "agree or against the implementation of the direct link with Netherlands' per 10-10-10 this current illegitimate and illegal state, the BES islands partial integration-related condition, have rejected oficieel (5040 = 65% No-against-votes). The same result was St Eustatius referendum on 17 desember 2014, who also rejected the current relationship with the Netherlands and has opted for autonomy process. 

It is almost incomprehensible how as responsible drivers your international conventions and to international law and the legal basis of our democratic state, the voice of the Boneriaans people and the people of St Eustatius, the legitimate rejection of your Illegal occupation and administration of these humble people ignore and relist an Illegal democratic stunt, would involve or inluizen by us in your own Dutch-European democratic process. Are you perhaps planning to bagalitiseren the democratic voice of the peoples in the future and to overrule this franchise ?, so that we may have condensed dissipation in your democratic process and mechanism, your consultative referendum?

Herewith I declare officially not to participate in your Euro-Dutch referendum because I under international law according to the overseas territory and people of Bonaire in the Kingdom of the Netherlands belong and not to the territory and people of the Netherlands in Europe controlled by your first and second chamber.

You offer it the opportunity with this referendum to draw the political situation and comparing our view with Ukraine-Crimea and Netherlands-Bonaire. For us similar to that Bonaire at your own arrangements and conventions and international law our drivers under open and public intimidation in this state context, and forced the territories of the BES islands Bonaire on 10-10-10. 

Once again we inform you that you these humble people, the Bonairean and Statian made miserable since and you have to realize that this must stop and should respect and help meet the needs of these peoples. Finally, I would point to a study conducted independently of the Spies report by your own Eksperten by light throughout BES nightmare and concluded the complete failure of this, the Royal Institute of Southeast Asian and Caribbean Studies (KITLV) research, the question about your Dutch representation and presence in Bonaire, 73% of the population Boneriaans be negative about this and that it is primarily by the current constitutional state context and structure.

So our advice to you is to respect the voice of the Boneriaans people, the referendum of 18 desember 2015 and various studies speak clearly and to initiate the process to ensure our self-determination, de-colonization and human rights, repair and help realize. Thus, withdrawal of your current policy denoting visible on Dutch re-population and neo-colonization of the Boneriaans people.

With kind regards,

James Finies, Nos Ke Boneiru Bek.

Cc. Directors of Public Body Bonaire Island Council of the Public Body Bonaire Members of the Standing Committee Member of the Standing Committee of the 1st and 2nd Room

Could fall-out from "Panama Papers" disclosures result in British takeover of "self-governing" Caribbean territories?

"The issue is not whether direct rule from London is possible or not - we only have to look at the British takeover of the Turks and Caicos Islands several years ago to conclude that the British have no problem instituting direct rule over its colonies to replace the delegated power it grants to these dependencies through the constitutional orders -  all the while preaching to the world, and to the territories themselves, that the territories are 'self-governing'. 

Thus, the call for direct British rule by the 'progressive anti-colonial leader' of the U.K. Labour Party should convince the territories that their self-government is an illusion. The reply by the chair of the British Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies All Parliamentary Group that a U.K. takeover would be unnecessary and unjust' because the territories are 'self-governing' belies the reality that a takeover can occur at any time, for whatever reason." - OTR 

UK could impose direct rule on tax havens, says Jeremy Corbyn

the guardian

The government should consider imposing direct orders on British overseas territories and crown dependencies to stop them acting as tax havens, Jeremy Corbyn has argued.

The Labour leader, speaking to the BBC in Harlow, Essex before a speech to launch the party’s local election manifesto in which he will accuse the prime minister of “pussyfooting” on tax matters – said the Cameron family’s own tax affairs should form part of an investigation into offshore avoidance.

Corbyn argued that the government should tell administrations in places like the Cayman Islands and British Virgin Islands: “Hang on, you are a government of a British dependent territory, a crown territory, you must obey UK tax law, you must not become a harbour for tax avoidance and tax evasion.”

What are the Panama Papers? A guide to history's biggest data leak

What is Mossack Fonseca, how big is it, and who uses offshore firms? Key questions about one of the biggest ever data leaks

 

Read more

There was precedence for direct rule to be imposed, Corbyn argued, and it should be done. He said: “The point is that they are not independent territories. They are self-governing, yes, but they are British crown dependent territories. Therefore, surely, there has to be an observance of UK tax law in those places.

“If they have become a place for systematic evasion and short-changing the public in this country, then something has to be done about it. Either those governments comply or a next step has to be taken.”

This could be done “almost immediately”, Corbyn said.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE HERE.

Virgin Islands Governor opposes U.S. proposal to control how U.S. dependencies spend their own revenue

MAPP OPPOSES LANGUAGE IN P.R. DEBT BILL GIVING U.S. TERRITORIES OPTIONAL FEDERAL OVERSIGHT OF PUBLIC FUNDS

ST. CROIX — (U.S. Virgin Islands) Governor Kenneth Mapp on Tuesday expressed strong concern to Congressional leaders in regard to proposed changes to language in the Puerto Rico debt restructuring bill released last week by Committee on Natural Resources in the U.S. Congress, which has jurisdiction over U.S. territories.

Mr. Mapp contends that the legislation, if enacted, would likely adversely affect the ability of the Virgin Islands to access capital markets and would raise the territory’s cost of borrowing.

READ THE FULL STORY IN:

 THE VIRGIN ISLANDS CONSORTIUM

Guam Commission Agrees on Political Status Education Programme

Commission on Decolonization rallies behind education plan

A less contentious meeting was held yesterday as the resumption of Tuesday's Commission on Decolonization meeting. Rather than a defensive back-and-forth with the governor, discussions focused on the "education" component of the process and the funding that comes with taking on the task.

Some $30,000 was allotted to each task force during the last fiscal year. An additional $150,000 in local funds is available to draw down according to the Calvo administration before a $300,000 grant from the federal government is made available.

During the meeting yesterday, members rallied behind the education process as the primary discussion focused on a motion by Sen. Rory Respicio on Gov. Eddie Calvo's proposal that the education component of the decolonization process be undertaken.

"I move that the commission adopt the education plan presented by Gov. Calvo, and amended by the commission, which sets a very aggressive political status education campaign in which the commission approves all educational materials about the respective status option," stated Respicio.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE HERE.

PUERTO RICO DIASPORA SUMMIT SET FOR 22-23 APRIL IN NY

Compañeros Unidos para la Descolonización 

de Puerto Rico

Governor of Guam's Plan for November Referendum Challenged

Calvo chided for vote plan

Fallout from Gov. Eddie Calvo's pronouncement last week that a vote on the island's political status could be held as soon as November continued yesterday during a meeting held of the Commission on Decolonization.

The commission recessed the meeting after two hours and will resume today at 3 p.m. in the governor's large conference room at Adelup.

During yesterday's meeting, Calvo held his ground as he responded to critics who took him to task for what was described as a "unilateral" announcement during his State of the Island address last Thursday. Calvo announced in the address that he intended to initiate the process to schedule a vote regarding Guam's political status as soon as the island's 2016 general election on Nov. 8.

"After years of talking and planning the plan and planning the plan for the plan, I'm finally putting as governor – for the first time, a plan. You may like it or you may not like it, but it is a plan," he said.

Speaker Judith Won Pat and Sen. Rory Respicio, both commission members, reminded Calvo that he was the leader of the commission. Respicio wanted Calvo to commit to ensuring that further action outside of commission decisions would not take place.

"As vice chair of this commission, I want to make sure that your efforts as an individual doesn't conflict with your responsibilities as chairman," Respicio said. He lauded Calvo's efforts to set a timeline and prioritize the self-determination vote. However, Respicio said that going forward, the commission needed to make the decisions. "I want to ask you, if it's possible that you hold off on trying to do a plebiscite before that itself is defined," Respicio said.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE IN THE GUAMDAILYPOST

West Papuans object to Indonesian envoy idea

RNZI/PACNEWS

The United Liberation Movement for West Papua has objected to a move by Indonesia to commission an envoy to the Pacific on behalf of its Melanesian population.

Indonesia's Coordinating Political, Legal and Security Affairs Minister Luhut Pandjaitan said he would propose assigning a Foreign Ministry official to engage with Pacific neighbours and advance Indonesia's commitment to resolving complicated issues surrounding Papua.

Minister Pandjaitan made the call this week on his Pacific regional tour which included visits to Fiji, New Caledonia and Papua New Guinea.

His tour was described by Indonesian officials as a bid to suppress regional support for the Liberation Movement which was recently granted observer status at the Melanesian Spearhead Group.

Explaining the need for an envoy, Pandjaitan said it was crucial that Jakarta start to “aggressively” inform the international community on its many undertakings in Papua.

However, the Liberation Movement's ambassador for Oceania and the Pacific Islands region, Amatus Douw, pointed out that he already serves the role as envoy for Papuan interests in the Pacific.

The Australia-based diplomat warned that Indonesia's envoy plan was about expanding its colonialist agenda and nothing to do with representing the interests of Papuans.

The Liberation Movement was established in 2014 by a unification process involving all the major West Papuan political representative groups.

Its admission into the MSG fold was an acknowledgment by the MSG full members (PNG, Fiji, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu and New Caledonia's indigenous Kanak movement) of West Papuan rights to regional representation.

Douw said Indonesia should not interfere with the representations of Papuan interests in Melanesia and the wider Pacific region.

“We never interfere over Asian affairs in your region,” said Douw. “Indonesia is not real Pacific or Melanesian states.”

However the Fiji-based Pacific Conference of Churches (PCC) warned that donors and foreign governments must not attach conditions to relief efforts, amidst concern that Indonesia is using financial inducements to ensure silence among other governments regarding Papua.

PCC General Secretary, Reverend Francois Pihaatae, said Minister Padjaitan had been “extremely vocal against groups seeking self-determination in Papua” and had publicly called for West Papuan activists to be removed from the country.

This comes after signs as early as 2014 that Fiji authorities were doing the bidding of Indonesia on the West Papua question.

“By accepting conditional aid," Reverend Pihaatae said, “regional governments do their people a great disservice.”

This sentiment was echoed by Amatus Douw who said that the support for West Papuan rights and self-determination efforts was very strong in Fiji.

“I strongly oppose Indonesia's use of natural disaster momentum to promote (its) political stand on West Papua's Independence movement in the Pacific region,” he said.

“If Indonesia really provide humanitarian aid, you must do with your good and pure heart without any dirty political motivation,” he said.

*****

Indonesia mulls appointing envoy to South Pacific

THE JAKARTA POST/PACNEWS

Indonesia is looking to strengthen its diplomatic ties with South Pacific countries by appointing a special envoy to the region.

Coordinating Political, Legal and Security Affairs Minister Luhut Pandjaitan on Wednesday said he would propose assigning an official from the Foreign Ministry to engage with the easterly neighbors and underscore Indonesia’s commitment to resolving complicated issues surrounding Papua.

Luhut said Jakarta’s eastward gaze was part of its wider efforts to counter the separatist narrative that had thus far prevented the government from developing Indonesia’s easternmost province.

“I will propose this to the President [Joko “Jokowi” Widodo] and the Foreign Minister [Retno LP Marsudi]. It is important that there is an envoy who can deliver our message to the Pacific island countries,” he told The Jakarta Post aboard an Indonesian Air Force aircraft en route to New Caledonia.

Luhut is in the region to consolidate support from member states of the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG), which have struggled to balance their growing ties with Jakarta with ongoing support for regional grassroot movements dedicated to protecting the rights of indigenous people of Papua and West Papua during decades of separatism.

The MSG is a sub-regional grouping in the Pacific, comprising Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Fiji and New Caledonia. Indonesia is an associate member.

Luhut said it was crucial that the government start to “aggressively” inform the international community on its many undertakings in Papua, with support from MSG members a crucial factor of success.

To this end, Luhut invited a number of Papuan regional heads and representatives of other provinces with a large Melanesian presence — Maluku, North Maluku, East Nusa Tenggara and West Papua.

“We have to thoroughly explain what’s being done — and we’re doing a lot,” he said.

According to him, the government is supporting Papua on a number of fronts, starting with increased regional funds, a renewed focus on health and education initiatives, the promise to resolve past human rights abuses and plans for more infrastructure and logistics projects.

Kicking off a three-day tour to countries in the region, Luhut will be in Fiji for bilateral meetings with Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama, Foreign Minister Ratu Inoke Kubuabola, and Agriculture, Maritime Development and Disaster Mitigation Minister Inia Seruiratu.

Luhut’s advisor Djauhari Oratmangun said the visit aimed to strengthen Indonesian ties with Fiji, consolidating the Pacific Island country’s continued support of Indonesia in the MSG forum.

Fiji, along with Papua New Guinea, has supported Indonesia’s role in the sub-regional forum as the country with the largest population of Melanesians.

Djauhari said the trip also had humanitarian goals, with Indonesia providing Fiji with US$5 million in disaster relief as well as a container of supplies from the Indonesian Army’s engineering directorate.

Meanwhile, General Elections Commission (KPU) chairman Husni Kamil Manik is set to sign a memorandum of understanding with the Fijian government on the transfer of knowledge on election organising.

After Fiji, Luhut and his entourage plan to visit Papua New Guinea before returning to Jakarta.