by Curlan Campbell
- Dr Alexis cited 1610 Bonham Case in legal argument for reparations
- British monarchy operated Transatlantic Slave Trade under Letters Patent
- Dr Alexis supports de-linking from Privy Council in favour of Caribbean Court of Justic
Dr Francis Alexis KC put forward a legal argument for reparations by referring to what is known within the legal fraternity as the Bonham Case of 1610. Dr Alexis took an example from one of the most notorious and contentious statements made in legal history: Chief Justice Sir Edward Coke in the UK stated that “for when an Act of Parliament is against the common right and reason, or repugnant, or impossible to be performed, the common law will controul it, and adjudge such Act to be void.”
While what Coke may have implied by his statement is a matter of contention among scholars, Dr Alexis said this is the crux of his case since, based on the statement, it can be argued that no act of Parliament legitimises slavery, therefore, making chattel slavery unconstitutional.
“Nobody is challenging any UK Act of Parliament when we say that slavery was illegal. There was no act of the UK Parliament saying you can go to Africa and kidnap people and bring them to the Americas,” Dr Alexis said.
He indicated that instead of passing an act of Parliament, the British monarchy operated the Transatlantic Slave Trade in what is referred to as a Letters Patent. Issued by the monarch, a Letters Patent is an open, public proclamation, an official communication older than Parliament, and over which Parliament exercises no authority.
Dr Alexis was this year’s guest speaker at the 3rd Annual Reparations Lecture on Tuesday, 23 May 2023, organised by The Grenada National Reparations Committee. The esteemed legal mind addressed attendees under the theme “Republicanism in the Age of Reparations” and made a case for reparation based on the value of 200 years of free labour from 15 million enslaved people in the Caribbean.
Referring to another cornerstone in his case for reparation is the 1772 court case of Somerset v Stewart in London. James Somerset, born around 1741 in West Africa, was captured and sold to European slavers at the age of 8. He was alleged to be the runaway slave of Charles Stewart and sought a writ of habeas corpus to prevent Stewart from seizing and detaining him in England for shipment to Jamaica to be sold.
The landmark judgment also proved to be a landmark contribution to the abolitionist cause, as it was found that chattel slavery was not compatible with English common law, effectively dismissing its legitimacy on the British mainland.
Dr Alexis is a supporter of de-linking from the London-based Privy Council in favour of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ). He also proved the involvement of the Privy Council in depriving Grace James, an Antiguan slave, of her freedom after she was brought to England by her enslaver mistress in 1827, which entitled her to her freedom. But after voluntarily returning to Antigua, James was subsequently told that she was no longer free.
With this, the esteemed legal mind clamoured for Government to prioritise having the topic of Republicanism on the table for discussion nationally. During his lecture, Dr Alexis indicated that Grenada’s road to becoming a republic rests on 2 critical decisions, one being to obtain a two-thirds majority vote on the bill by both Parliament and the people. He said if Grenada does move to become a republic, this does not absolve the British monarchy of responsibility to pay reparations.
“The British (monarch) cannot get away from reparations by saying they have moved into republicanism. The debt is owed not to the monarch of Grenada. The debt is not owed to the Government of Grenada. The debt is owed to the people of Grenada. So whether we are in monarchism or republicanism, they have to pay the debt,” he said.
Dr Alexis has called upon King Charles III to comply with the Caricom 10-point action plan and apologise for their role in chattel slavery. He implored the Grenada National Reparations Committee to continue applying pressure on the British Government to pay reparations.
Tying reparations to republicanism is such absolute nonsense. Should the Britain and the monarchy as INSTITUTIONS provide some form of reparations and an apology? Absolutely. But the King himself, and by extension the GRENADIAN monarchy (which is what the institution is in all Grenadian matters) are totally innocent for these crimes. Alexis, Gill and their fellows trying to tie the king personally to slavery, and thus try to argue he isn’t deserving to be our head of state, is absolute nonsense.