by Curlan Campbell
- Opposition approved 2 Constitution (Oath of Allegiance) Bills, though that support was not unconditional
- NNP chairman sharply opposed proposed Age of Civil Legal Responsibility Amendment Bill
- Dr Mitchell doubts bill will survive once public fully understands its contents
Former Prime Minister and current Chairman of the New National Party (NNP), Dr Keith Mitchell, has voiced firm support for the government’s Oath of Allegiance legislation, calling it a matter of national dignity and identity. However, he expressed sharp opposition to the proposed Age of Civil Legal Responsibility Amendment Bill, citing deep concerns about its potential impact on families and parental rights.
Dr Mitchell met with protesters and reporters outside Parliament on Thursday, 24 July, where he emphasised the historical and cultural importance of shifting allegiance from the British monarchy to the Grenadian state. He noted that Grenada should follow in the footsteps of Barbados and other Caribbean nations in asserting its sovereignty. “We pledge in allegiance to Grenada, and then we still have a head of state of the country, King Charles. What does King Charles know about us? So clearly, you know, Barbados moved, and he himself (King Charles) came to Barbados and praised Barbados for the change. So he doesn’t have a fundamental problem. He understands, as a human being, that a nation of people should be pledging allegiance to themselves, not to any foreign person.”
While the opposition party appears to support the principle, Dr Mitchell acknowledged debate over whether a referendum should accompany the legislation. He stated that if Grenada is going to hold a referendum, it should include the issue of the head of state along with other core matters that shape and define who we are as a people. He said a referendum is necessary because this isn’t just a minor issue; it’s only one small part of a much larger process.
Dr Mitchell also reflected on the last referendum attempt, blaming its failure on party politics. “Dickon was not the leader of the NDC, so I can’t come in and throw it at him, but he could apologise on behalf of his own party for the position that they took against a fundamental issue as this purely on the basis of politics,” he said. “And I mentioned, every time you go to Carriacou, they want the name on the passport. We give a referendum bill to support it. And could you imagine the people voted based on the advice of the political party? They support the National Democratic Congress, they voted against something that they wanted and asked for, historically.”
He made it clear that if the government brings forward a broader constitutional reform bill, the NNP will support it. “Absolutely. I mean, I think that is clear. One thing you know about me and the NNP that I led, and I believe the same NNP today, in that sense, anything we believe is right for the country, whether we’re in government or opposition, we are going to support. So since they have that understanding, the process should not be very long.” He continued, “Because our children and grandchildren must not go through what we went through, and have to be pledging to some foreign person that we had no relationship with at all going forward.”
On the other hand, Dr Mitchell expressed grave reservations about the Age of Civil Legal Responsibility Amendment Bill, which proposes allowing minors aged 16 and older to access sexual and reproductive healthcare without parental consent. He believes that the state should not dictate how parents should raise their children. He argues that it should not be up to a minister or the government to determine what rules should be enforced. “I fundamentally disagree with this perspective. Instead, we should allow the people to have a voice in these matters…And we made our point clear on this, this affects the family structure in the society, and it requires thorough consultation with the people of the country.”
He stressed the need for broad consultation, particularly with stakeholders such as parents, churches, the business community, and civil society. “I can’t speak for the people in general, but I know that fathers and mothers will certainly want to have a say. So I did speak to the Prime Minister and to the opposition, to the government, and they had this on all stages, and I thought it was absolutely crazy to even consider such a bill.”
Ultimately, Dr Mitchell doubts the bill will survive once the public fully understands its contents. “So, I am not going to say much more because since the government itself recognises that it must have serious consultation, my own belief is that when people know the details of this bill. I don’t see the government bringing it back.”
In the interim, Lower House MPs will jointly consult the public regarding the 2 bills. The bills will require government and state officials to swear allegiance to Grenada instead of the King and his successors. During the 24 July session, members of the opposition approved the Constitution (Oath of Allegiance) (Amendment) (No. 1) Bill, 2025 and Constitution (Oath of Allegiance) (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 2025, though that support was not unconditional.
The King came in handy when Canada needed to assert its independence and sovereignty. For a nation with no army the our King helps keep us from being absorbed by a larger neighbour.