by Dr Francis Alexis KC
By different routes, independence Eastern Caribbean (EC) Constitutions, like all other independence Caribbean Constitutions, ensure that the Form of the Oath of Allegiance (Oath) may be changed without a referendum.
Oath not in Constitution: Prescribing
In 3 independent EC countries, the Constitution does not contain the Oath. The Constitution says: ‘“oath of allegiance” means such oath of allegiance as may be prescribed by law;’ — Dominica s 121(1); St Lucia s 124(1); St Vincent s 105(1). By those same provisions, ‘law’ includes ‘any instrument having the force of law’. So, the prescribing may be done, not only by an Act of Parliament, but also by delegated legislation. Compare The Bahamas arts 37 & 137(1). In Trinidad & Tobago, s 3 (1), it may be done ‘by or under an Act’.
The Oath has been prescribed. In St Vincent it is by the Oaths by Officials Act, Cap 223, amended in June 2016, requiring allegiance to ‘St Vincent and The Grenadines’. In St Lucia it is by the Official Oaths Act, Cap 1.17, s 2(1) with Sch 1 requiring allegiance to ‘Saint Lucia’; with s 2(2) catering for that to be amended by an Order by Cabinet. In Dominica members of the House of Assembly are required by their Standing Orders SRO 9 of 1986 with its Appendix to swear or affirm allegiance to ‘the Commonwealth of Dominica’.
Oath in Constitution: Altering
In the 3 other independent EC countries, the Constitution contains the Oath: Sch 3 in Antigua & Barbuda, Sch 3 in Grenada, and Sch 4 in St Kitts & Nevis. But that Schedule is not in the list in Sch 1 which identifies the provisions whose alteration requires referendum approval. While, then, the Oath is contained in the Constitution, its alteration does not require referendum approval; an Act of Parliament passed with the requisite majority suffices.
Oath in all 6
So, each of the 6 independent EC countries has the Oath; in the Constitution in 3, in prescribing legislation in the other 3. The point being emphasised is that, in all those 6 EC countries, as in all other independent Caribbean countries, changing the Oath of Allegiance does not require approval at a referendum.
Well people of grenada you voted this prime minister in here is now spending 50 million dollars on this celebration that equals one million dollars a year of your money and I’ll tell you something you all he played you all down the line and you followed him like like sheep well at the end of the day it’s all your fault so at the end of the day you vote with him in and you’ve got another four years of him all that 50 million dollars could have been spent better self elsewhere healthcare pensions for the poor housing for the poor etc etc etc and you’re allowing this prime minister to suspend all that money your money on one day 50 million dollars you are all fools allowing this man to spend that kind of money and it’s all fake he is fake he doesn’t care about any of you lot and you allowed him to do it falls on you.
Barbados changed its “allegiance”. What difference did that make? If Barbadians were allowed to vote on this issue they would, overwhelming, have voted no.
If Grenada wants to change “allegiance” then it should let the people do so by voting – whether the option to do so is “interpreted” as being not technically required.
Mr. Alexis’ “backdoor solution” is highy insulting, disrespectful and inconsiderate to our Grenadian people. It’s our country and our right to decide such matters. I hope, that with all his exceptional constitutional knowledge and intellect, he appreciates that.
This is the modus operandi of republicans all over this region, unfortunately. If they could, they’d all go the route of Barbados, because they know they’d lose a referendum. Peter Wickham, who advised the Bajan government on the republic transition, was so kind as to be patently open and transparent about his contempt for the voter and democracy, saying he advised against holding a republic referendum, because a referendum would “provide an opposition and an opportunity to oppose”.
A referendum may not be REQUIRED to change the oath, but fact remains we the Grenadian people still voted against changing the oath in the 2016 referendum. No change is needed. The king is, constitutionally, the living embodiment of Grenada, and as such swearing allegiance to him is already the same as swearing allegiance to Grenada.