Categories
News

The Electoral and Constitutional Fiasco in Turks and Caicos Islands

Published in TCI POST on 09th March 2013.

The Attorney General vs Ms. Amanda Missick
The Acting Attorney General of the Turks and Caicos Islands has filed in the supreme court against Ms. Amanda Missick stating the following:
“Following receipt of copies of the section 49(1)(f) Notices and related correspondence supplied to me by the TCI Integrity Commission and having caused background research to be undertaken in the Lands Division of the Chambers, I have come to the conclusion that I should act under section 50(3) of the Constitution, and today a challenge to the veracity of the declaration made by Ms. Amanda Missick, PNP candidate for the upcoming by-election in the Cheshire Hall and Richmond Hill Electoral District on 22 March 2013 has been filed before the Supreme Court.
FACT: It is a fact that Ms. Amanda Missick has a property 60804/138 with a TCIG belonger discount charge (see exhibit A)
According to the Integrity Commission and the Attorney General such a charge is considered to be a contract with Government and the Candidate shall to give NOTICE to the Integrity Commission on or before Nomination Day, in accordance with Section 49 (1)f of the TCI Constitution.
Disputable: It is disputable whether someone who has a Crown freehold property with a subsistent belonger discount charge (having had the property for less than 10 years after obtaining freehold title), is considered as having a contract with Government.
FACT: If a potential Candidate does not comply with Section 49 (1)f of the TCI Constitution 2011 he /she shall not be qualified to be an elected member of the House of Assembly. It states: 49.—(1) No person shall be qualified to be an elected member of the House of Assembly who, on the date of his or her nomination for election: (f) is a party to, or a partner in a firm or a director or manager of a company which is a party to, any contract with the Government and has not, by that date, disclosed in a notice to the Integrity Commission the nature of such contract and his or her interest, or the interest of such firm or company, in it;
FACT: The Constitution does not give a defined time period prior to Nomination Day during which such notice of contract with Government should be made. It simply states that such contracts should be “by that date (NOMINATION DAY), disclosed in a notice to the Integrity Commission the nature of such contract and his or her interest, or the interest of such firm or company, in it”
FACT: There is no prescribed form for giving such notice of contract with Government to the Integrity Commission. It simply says “disclosure in notice to the Integrity Commission”. This fact is also supported by the varied instruments of submission used by other elected members of the House of Assembly during the 2012 nomination process, who have made declarations under section 49 (1)f. Some used emailed submission, some used written hand delivered letters and some could have even called in.

Amanda-Lease Cancellation
THEREFORE:
FACT: Ms Amanda Missick made a Declaration to the Integrity Commission in on Oct 24, 2012 and this was publicized by the Integrity Commission in a Contracts Notice Register (see exhibit B). This declaration should have satisfied the condition under Section 49 (1)f of the Constitution, for nomination in the By-election, since such the notice is not time bound prior to nomination day and there is no legal requirement to make another declaration to the Integrity Commission unless there is additional information to be declare or remove, which is not the case with Ms. Missick.
Conclusion: Ms. Amanda Missick should not be disqualified. She did declare her interest to the Integrity Commission on time as she did so on October 24, 2012 and again on February 15, 2013, on a form used for members of the House of Assembly to declare their registrable Interest (including contracts with Government) which is a public document.
Also if the Judge rules that Crown freehold land with subsistent belonger discount charge is NOT contract with Government, then Ms. Missick would have had nothing to declare and should not be disqualified.
Furthermore:
If it is determined by the Courts that Crown Freehold title with subsistent belonger discount charge is a contract with Government, this should not affect Ms Missick as she made declaration of such contract on October 24, 2012 and again on February 15, 2013.
I rest my case and the learned Judge should see it likewise.
So I am encouraging all PNPs to Stay the Course!
Cheshire Hall Voter (Plaintiff) Vs Oral Selver

Oral Leasehold
A Cheshire Hall Voter filed in the Courts on March 8, 2013 against Isaac Oral Selver on the grounds that he failed to comply with the provisions of Section 49(1)f of the TCI Constitution.
It has been discovered that Mr. Oral Selver is the Leasee of Crown land 50206/1/1 – North Caicos (2.5 acres) which was issued on 12.11.2004 for a period of 3 years. Mr. Selver failed to pay his lease and in April 2011, he wrote to the PS of the Lands Department to have his lease extended. His letter was acknowledged in April 2011, and he was given conditions upon which the lease would be extended. The conditions included obtaining a building permit which he had, as stated in his reply letter and payment of arrears on the lease. Mr. Selver accepted the Offer and paid the arrears on the Property on December 24, 2012 (shortly after 2012 general elections).
Oral Lease Payment
The Plaintiff is of the view that Mr. Selver had a contract with Government on nomination day 2012 (October 25, 2012) and did not declare this interest at that time as required by Section 49(1)f of the constitution.
The Plaintiff is also of the view that Mr. Oral Selver still has a contract with Government i.e. the lease on property 50206/1/1 as he has accepted the conditional offer to extend the lease and is actively engaged with the Lands Department to retain the lease, which still remains in his name on the Lands register (see exhibit). Also of note is that the application procedure by the Lands Department for the termination of the lease has not been done. This procedure was use in the termination of a Conditional Purchase Lease (CPL) owned by Ms Amanda Missick, on property 60400/277 –Chalk Sound. Ms. Missick obtained the CPL around the same time as Mr Selver in 2004 and was denied extension without hesitation, that culminated in the cancellation of her lease on March 22, 2010.
Therefore:
We conclude that Mr Oral Selver failed to declare his contract with Government by nomination days October 25, 2012 and March 1, 2013 and should be disqualified under Section 49 (1)f.
The Attorney General
Vs
George Lightbourne
Hugh Derek Taylor
Josephine Connelly
Edwin Astwood
Vaden Delroy Williams
The Acting Attorney General is challenging the defendants listed, under section 53(2) of the constitution “An application to the Supreme Court for the determination of any question under subsection (1) may be made by the Attorney General or by any person who is a registered elector; and an application for the determination of any question under subsection (1)(b) may also be made by any member of the House of Assembly” It has been determined that the defendants have not filed all of their contracts (Crown freehold property with subsistent belonger discount charge) with Government and should be disqualified.
Contracts Notice Register – General Elections_001 Copy
The question for the Judge to rule on in this case is whether Crown freehold land with subsistent belonger discount charge is a contract with Government. If the Judge rule that it is then all of the elected members listed above will be disqualified and cease being members of the House of Assembly.
The next question to be determined by (Judge or AG?) is how should the vacated 5 seats in the House of Assembly be filled?
I am of the view that:
A constituency in the 2012 election, which had more than 2 candidates contesting but returning only 1 member to the House of Assembly (eg Wheeland), should go to a By-election if the elected member is disqualified.
A constituency in the 2012 election, which had only 2 candidates contesting and returning only 1 member to the House of Assembly (eg Grand Turk North or Grand Turk South), that the seat should be turned over to the other candidate upon disqualification of the elected candidate. If the non-elected Candidate is unavailable then the seat should go to a By-election.
A constituency in the 2012 election, which had more than 2 candidates contesting but returning more than 1 member to the House of Assembly (eg All-Islands Constituency), that the vacated seats due to disqualifications should be filled using the non-elected candidates based on the next highest number of votes and availability.
The British has indeed made a mockery of our democracy and the judicial system has fallen victim to the poorly drafted and ill-conceived laws enacted by the British, including of 2011 Constitution which is top of the list.
This is indeed a time for the PNP and PDM to come together and form a coalition Government and to fast track this country towards independence. I firmly believe that it is our people as opposed to our leaders and elected officials that are against unity and coalition in preference of the euphoria of partisan politics. It is however, our leaders who must make that bold decisions and lead the people in the direction of a united front in the best interest of the Turks and Caicos Islands.

20130309-124642.jpg

20130309-124544.jpg

Categories
Turksjournal Picks

ANARCHY

20130309-120017.jpg

Categories
News

Who is behind the New Political Chaos in Turks and Caicos Islands?

MEDIA STATEMENT BY ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL RHONDALEE BRAITHWAITE-KNOWLES ON CHALLENGES AGAINST MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT

“Separate and apart from the confidential declaration required to made to the Integrity Commission under the Integrity Commission Ordinance by a person in public life, the Constitution requires a candidate for election, on nomination day to make a declaration that he or she is qualified for election and that no disqualification mentioned in section 49(1) of the Constitution applies to him or her. In addition, section 49(1)(f) of the Constitution requires such a candidate to notify the Integrity Commission, prior to nomination day, of the existence of any contract between that candidate and the Government. Failure to so notify the Integrity Commission would result in a candidate being disqualified to stand in an election.

“Following receipt of copies of the section 49(1)(f) Notices and related correspondence supplied to me by the TCI Integrity Commission and having caused background research to be undertaken in the Lands Division of the Chambers, I have come to the conclusion that I should act under section 50(3) of the Constitution, and today a challenge to the veracity of the declaration made by Ms. Amanda Missick, PNP candidate for the upcoming by-election in the Cheshire Hall and Richmond Hill Electoral District on 22 March 2013 has been filed before the Supreme Court.

“On the basis of the background research undertaken I have also come to the conclusion that the election of certain sitting members of the House of Assembly should be challenged under section 53(2) of the Constitution. In that regard, challenges have also been filed today before the Supreme Court challenging the elections of Mr George Lightbourne elected member in the House of Assembly for the Grand Turk North Electoral District; Mr. Edwin Astwood elected member in the House of Assembly for the Grand Turk, South Electoral District; Mr. Derek Taylor member in the House of Assembly for the All Islands Electoral District; Mrs. Josephine Connolly elected member in the House of Assembly for the All Islands Electoral District and Delroy Williams elected member in the House of Assembly for the Wheeland Electoral District.

“The basis of each of these challenges is that when each of the individuals made their section 50(1) Nomination Day declaration to the Supervisor of Elections for the 9th November 2012 General Election and the upcoming 22nd March 2013 by-election, a disqualification mentioned in section 49(1)(f) applied to each them in that each of them has a contract with the Government which, by that date, they had not given notice of to the Integrity Commission, as required by section 49(1)(f) of the Constitution. The type of contract in each case is a charge to secure the payment to the Crown of a “Belonger Discount” (applicable under the Crown Land Policy) in the event of a sale in prescribed circumstances.

“I have asked the Court to determine whether in each case, the individual is or is not qualified to be an elected member of the House considering the failure to give notice of the respective charges.

“The Constitution provides for a process for challenge in each of these cases in the public interest. If the Court determines that each member is disqualified then,

a) In the case of Ms. Missick, she will not be able to stand for election on 22nd March and the sole remaining candidate will be declared elected;

b) In the case of the members of the House of Assembly, their seats will be vacated and a by-election will have to be called. A decision on their disqualification would not prevent them from standing in a subsequent by-election called as a result.

20130309-112009.jpg

20130309-112030.jpg

20130309-112050.jpg

Categories
News

Dellis Cay Groundbreaking June 2008

Dellis Cay Groundbreaking in June 2008.
Please click on the link and watch the video.

20130308-151702.jpg

Categories
News People

Life of Cem Kinay, Developer of Dellis Cay Turks and Caicos Islands

Life of Cem Kinay,Developer and owner of Dellis Cay in Turks and Caicos Islands

PLEASE CLICK  ON THE LINK TO WATCH THE VIDEO

20130307-134506.jpg

Categories
News

Turks and Caicos Premier’s Response to UK Minister Mark Simmonds

Hon. Premier’s Response to Mr. Mark Simmonds Re: VAT

Minister Mark Simmonds MP
Minister for the Overseas Territories
Foreign & Commonwealth Office
King Charles Street
London SW1A 2AH
Dear Minister Simmonds,
I acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 25th instant. As your letter does much more than convey the decision of Her Majesty’s Government not to implement VAT come April 1st, my sentiments were that it required more than a mere acknowledgment of receipt.
The Turks and Caicos Island Government does not doubt your commitment to the development of the TCI and so to the extent that we disagree it must necessarily be on our respective paths to that end. In turn I hope that Her Majesty’s Government recognizes that the commitment of the TCI Government to the economic, social and indeed political development of the TCI must be greater, not least because that development benefits Turks and Caicos Islanders and all those who call these Islands home.
In that context and in the true spirit of partnership I trust that HMG will allow the TCI Government the discretion to implement those policies which in our view, will result in our economic recovery and social development. We cannot bear the responsibility of ensuring sound finances without a commensurate degree of autonomy with respect to revenue generation and spending initiatives.
I can say without fear of contradiction that our Government has always been open to frank debate and compromise with HMG and all its representatives. We will not, however, allow our desire for compromise to cause us to abdicate our responsibility to the people of the TCI. I turn now to the several issues in your letter that require specific comment.
Government of the Turks and Caicos Islands
You have invited the members of the Assembly to condemn what you describe as “vitriolic public attacks” on members of the judiciary and public servants. I do not know what it is you describe as vitriolic public attacks as you have provided no example. In any event I am sure that like me, my colleagues in the House would be slow to take any position that would leave any person in this country feeling that they are unable to comment on matters of public importance or to be critical of any institution or public officer.
The concept of free speech is a bastion of democracy. It is a check and balance against tyranny. The essential ideal of self government by the people is undermined if those in power are able to manipulate the electorate by either withholding information or stifling criticism. It was the English author Edward Bulwer-Lytton who wrote: “Beneath the rule of men entirely great. The pen is mightier than the sword”. It is therefore no wonder that the right of free speech has been described as “a safety valve to let off steam when people might otherwise be bent on revolution”. Those who abuse the right of free speech open themselves to criminal prosecution or civil suit. The courts in my view are best suited to determine whether laws have been breached or whether unabashed but otherwise lawful criticism, is being characterized as vitriolic public attack.
You have also denounced the Assembly’s decision to bring the VAT Repeal by way of Private Members Motion as being unacceptable. The Bill was neither conceived nor presented as a Government Bill with the result that both Cabinet and the Attorney General’s Chambers were properly excluded. The purpose of the Bill was to repeal legislation passed by the Interim Administration. The Interim Administration was headed by the same Governor who continues to be the President of the Cabinet and who together with the FCO had much vested in the VAT Ordinance. It would in the circumstances, be foolhardy for a Parliament that was united in its resolve to see the Ordinance repealed, to seek to have the Repeal Bill originate in a Cabinet where the Opposition does not have a voice and where the Governor wields disproportionate power and influence to the extent that he may refuse to have the question of the Repeal Ordinance placed on the Cabinet Agenda.
The fact that the Governor has refused to assent to the Repeal Bill and that you have failed to instruct him to assent to it and his comments immediately following the passage of the Bill through the Assembly, is justification enough for our decision. The members of the Assembly are bound by the Constitution and the laws of the Turks and Caicos Islands generally and we each have a duty to represent the best interest of the Turks and Caicos Islands. In acting as we did we have been true to both law and duty and in the circumstances we need neither the blessing nor approval of the FCO. That you have ascribed a sinister motive to our action is indeed regrettable. Your castigation of the Assembly’s actions in the way that you have could leave one with the clear impression that you see the Assembly as no more than an extension of the Executive and that is likewise most unfortunate.
Finally we remain concerned that you have decided against instructing the Governor to assent the Repeal Bill. Unless the Bill is assented to, the people of these Islands will continue to question Her Majesty’s Government’s commitment to the ideals of democracy in the Turks and Caicos Islands and that will not augur well for the partnership that we are desirous of building.
The Government will likewise have legitimate reason to believe that there is not a genuine intention on the part of Her Majesty’s Government to allow the TCI Government to move forward unimpeded. There will always be the real threat that the VAT can be implemented by the stroke of a pen without the need for further debate. I am firm in my conviction that on the question of VAT the only fair solution is for the Ordinance to be repealed thus removing once and for all the possibility of taxation without representation. I hope that you will give this course further consideration.
For the reasons you indicate I am likewise copying this letter to the Leader of the Opposition.
Sincerely
Dr. The Hon. Rufus W. Ewing
Premier, Turks and Caicos Islands

20130301-143327.jpg

20130301-143427.jpg

Categories
News

Press Release from the Governor of Turks and Caicos Islands about VAT

Press Release From the Governor’s Office Re-Decision Not To Implement VAT

The UK Government has agreed that VAT will not be implemented in the TCI at this time. The TCI Government and opposition have clearly stated their opposition to the implementation of VAT.
It remains Her Majesty’s Government’s (HMG) view that VAT would provide a more stable, fairer and broader based system of revenue for TCI than that which is currently in place.
The Government of TCI has a responsibility to ensure sound finances in the Territory. This includes constraining expenditure within the legally binding fiscal framework which is now in place and being able to refinance its debts in 2016 without a further UK Government loan guarantee.
The TCI Government will face more difficult choices to ensure stable and sustainable revenues and expenditures in the absence of VAT.
HMG is clear that we will not accept a return to the dire financial situation in TCI which prevailed before the Interim Administration.
FCO Minister, Mark Simmonds, issued a letter to TCI Premier the Hon Dr Rufus Ewing yesterday evening, Mon, 25 Feb 2013. This was also sent to the Leader of the Official Opposition in the TCI simultaneously. This was issued in response a letter from the TCI Premier dated 29 January 2013 which raised a number of concerns about the proposed implementation of VAT in the TCI from 1 April 2013.

20130226-235843.jpg

20130226-235934.jpg

20130227-000022.jpg

Categories
News

ATTORNEY GENERAL IN TURKS AND CAICOS EXPLAINS THE ERROR

Published in TCI Weekly Now on 22nd February 2013

Attorney General Huw Shepheard on Wednesday issued another follow up press release in an attempt to explain why he reacted to a news report on the government radio station. Based on information supplied by family members of former premier Michael Misick, the early RTC news broadcast had announced that Misick had been granted bail and released from a Brazilian prison.

Misick had been arrested in Rio de Janeiro on an international warrant on December 7 last year and had been held in custody pending an application for extradition by Britain on behalf of the TCI.

Shepheard issued his own press release that same morning denying that Misick had been released. Later the same day, Sheapheard issued a second release saying that a Brazilian court had in fact released Misick on bail while extradition procedures were worked through,

In his latest statement, the attorney general says he was incorrectly informed by Brazilian authorities when he issued his first denial of the bail report. Shepheard has again repeated his earlier remarks stating that his office had sent the required extradition documents within the required time frame and Misick’s extradition is pending.

“My initial statement on the release of Michael Misick from custody in Brazil, was truthful to the best of my belief and was based on credible information that had been received from the authorities in Brazil. It turned out that they were mistaken and therefore that I had been misinformed and accordingly I corrected my statement,” Shepheard said.

“I take this opportunity to repeat that the extradition request has been made properly and in accordance with normal law and procedure. The TCIG has met its obligations under the Extradition Treaty to serve the papers on the proper authorities in Brazil within the set time limit. Due process must now be followed, that complies with the Treaty and with Brazilian law,” he added.

Reportedly, Misick had been granted bail because the papers from Shepheard arrived late in Brazil.

Meanwhile, Radio Turks and Caicos is claiming they are a fair and balanced media site. However, the government sponsored station has in the past come in for criticism for employing two well known members of the Progressive National Party (PNP) — current speaker of the house Robert Hall and PNP-appointed House Member Ruth Blackman — to host the Expressions radio show

20130222-120515.jpg

Categories
News

CARICOM expressed Grave Concern about Turks and Caicos Islands Affairs

by Hayden Boyce – Publisher & Editor-in-Chief,
Published in Sun TCI on 20th of February 2013

The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) has expressed “grave concern” about the state of political affairs in the Turks and Caicos Islands.

In fact, the regional leaders are taking matters in this country so seriously that they intend to raise concerns indentified by Premier Dr. Rufus Ewing with representatives of the British Government.

In a communiqué issued at the conclusion of the 24th Inter-sessional Heads of Government meeting held in Port-Au-Prince, Haiti, the Caribbean leaders stated: “The Conference noted with grave concern that, though the elections of November 2012 had led to the restoration of representative government, the overall state of political affairs remained less than desirable and the restoration of true democracy was still a far way off. The 2011 constitution, conceived in London and thrust upon the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands when they were without representation, was viewed as a mere by-law for the continuance of direct rule under the pretext of representative democracy.”

The CARICOM report added: “Of additional concern were the challenges emanating from the workings of the justice system in relation to the criminal investigations that followed the commission of enquiry, and what was portrayed as “constant infractions of democratic principles and insults to the ideals of elected government”.

The Conference noted the reaffirmation of the Turks and Caicos Islands Government’s commitment to the Caribbean Community as well as the expressed appreciation for the pronouncements of the Community on the situation in TCI. It was decided to continue to keep the situation under close review and to raise concerns with representatives of the British Government.”

The communiqué said that the conference “received with interest” the address made by the Premier of the Turks and Caicos Islands, Dr. Rufus Ewing.

It was the first meeting of the Community at which the Turks and Caicos Islands had been officially represented by a democratically elected Government since the suspension of its constitution in August 2009, and a three-year period of direct rule by the United Kingdom Government.

In his maiden speech to a CARICOM Heads of Government meeting on Tuesday, Premier Ewing called on CARICOM (Caribbean Community), to advocate on the international stage for the full restoration of the institutions of true democracy in the Turks and Caicos Islands.

He also asked regional leaders to “support our (Turks and Caicos Islands) cries for removal of the spectre of colonial influences of the past, as we fight for our rights on our journey towards true self governance and self determination”.

Dr. Ewing’s said then: “The current state of affairs in the Turks and Caicos Islands has the potential to throw our Country into chaos. For so long as I am the leader and principal spokesman of the Government of the Turks and Caicos Islands, I will use every means available to me to ensure that does not happen.”

20130221-102451.jpg

20130221-102530.jpg

20130221-102607.jpg

Categories
News

Premier of Turks and Caicos Dr Rufus Ewing Address to CARICOM

20130219-210839.jpgTurks and Caicos Islands Premier Dr. Rufus Ewing Address to CARICOM

PREMIER OF THE TURKS AND CAICOS ISLANDS
HON. DR. RUFUS W. EWING
ADDRESS TO THE CARICOM HEADS OF GOVERNMENT AT THE TWENTY-FOURTH INTER-SESSIONAL MEETING
PORT AU PRINCE
HAITI
FEBRUARY 18th 2013
His Excellency Michel Martelly, President of the Republic of Haiti and Chairman of CARICOM, Hon. Laurent Lamothe, Prime Minister of Haiti, Ambassador Irwin LaRocque, Secretary General of CARICOM, Heads of State of CARICOM and other Delegates present, friends all. I bring you greetings on behalf of the Government and people of the Turks and Caicos Islands. I would like to thank the CARICOM Secretariat and you the CARICOM Heads of Government for affording me the opportunity to address this gathering on matters concerning the Turks and Caicos Islands.
It is indeed an honour to be here and I consider it a privilege to address you at this very significant Twenty-Fourth Inter-Sessional Meeting. This meeting is of significance, because it is the first meeting of CARICOM at which the Turks and Caicos Islands is being officially represented by a democratically elected Government since the suspension of our Constitution in August 2009. It is also of significance, because it the first of such meetings to be held by one of our closest neighbours and important trading partner. Given the long relationship between the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands and the people of Haiti, my own father captaining many voyages to Haiti, I feel able to say that Haiti’s membership in CARICOM, is a recognition within the region, of our brotherhood with Haiti. Haiti is a part of us and we are a part of Haiti.
The Turks and Caicos Islands extends its congratulations to His Excellency Martelly and the people of Haiti and do look forward to both our nations growing from strength to strength within the Caribbean Community.
On November 9th 2012, the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands were granted the ability to exercise their democratic right to elect a representative government following a three year period of direct rule by United Kingdom Government. Though these elections have indeed led to the restoration of ministerial government, the overall state of political affairs remains less than desirable in our islands. The restoration of true democracy is still a far way off. In the Turks and Caicos Islands, we are today being governed by a constitution that was conceived in White Hall, and was for all intents and purposes thrust upon the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands, at a time when they were without representation. The 2011 Constitution is merely a by-law for the continuance of direct rule under the pretext of representative democracy.
Distinguished colleagues, friends, we seize the opportunity of this audience to reflect briefly on the evolution of events in our country over the past three years, so that you may better appreciate our realities and come to understand that our yearnings are not unique. The people of the Turks and Caicos Islands, wish simply to serve democracy because they are confident that if they serve democracy, democracy will in turn serve them.
In 2008, a Commission of Inquiry presided upon by a sole Judge; found that there was evidence of systemic corruption, by politicians, senior government officials and co-conspirator developers. The findings of the Inquiry also suggested that there were significant deficiencies within the administrative arm of Government. Following on from his findings, the Commissioner made several recommendations including the investigation of those persons accused of wrong-doing, but more importantly, the suspension of vital parts of our 2006 constitution, allowing for direct rule from the UK by an Interim Administration from August 2009.
During the period of direct rule from the United Kingdom, all power was vested in the office of the Governor, so that he wielded absolute power. The Advisory Council and the Consultative Forum, whose members were appointed by the Governor, were institutions established by the Interim Administration designed to mimic respectively the Cabinet and the House of Assembly. His Excellency was not however bound to take the advice of either body. Under the Direct authority of the United Kingdom Government the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands witnessed the following:
The implementation of new laws such as “The Trial Without Jury Law” and amendments to the laws governing the admissibility of Hearsay Evidence. To the extent that these laws are intended to be retroactive, they erode the confidence in the Judiciary that must underpin every democracy and challenge the very rule of law that the Interim Administration was charged to promote.
The approval of budgets without debate, so that there was no opportunity for the ordinary citizen to influence in any way, how his tax dollar was being spent,
The transfer of protected pension funds from the National Insurance Fund to the Consolidated Fund
The implementation of laws facilitating the imposition of taxation against the wishes of the people
Such were but some the abuses of the United Kingdom Government visited upon the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands in the name of Democracy and Good Governance during the rule of the Interim Government.
Your Excellency, I wish to assure the Community, that the Government and people of the Turks and Caicos Islands are committed to all the principles of democracy and the tenets of good governance. As a Government, we are committed to strengthening where they exist and creating where they do not exist, all those institutions that promote democracy and good governance. Guided by that commitment, the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands by and large welcomed the need for reforms and for the strengthening of governance systems. By and large we acknowledged that the allegations of corruption and maladministration necessitated investigation, we have however, always been concerned that the inquiry was left to a lone Commissioner and we have always maintained that the suspension of our constitution and the establishment of an Interim Administration, was an inappropriate response to the Commissioner’s findings and ran counter to every principle of democracy and good governance.
Our sense of what is right and decent and fair compels us to question even to this day, why it is that former Governor Tauwhare, who was a member of the Cabinet for a significant period of the last elected government’s term, has not been required to speak to his involvement in the alleged wrong doings. Your Excellency, as you would expect, I am slow to comment on judicial processes, but I would betray my duty to the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands if I did not express our concern that in relation to the criminal investigations that followed the commission of inquiry, persons who were charged criminally have avoided the criminal process by paying millions of dollars into the treasury before they were even called upon to answer the charge. This type of action is abusive and nothing short of corrupt. It is the more egregious, because those who have to date been able to purchase their justice, have not been Turks and Caicos Islanders. When those who dispense justice are allowed to see black or white, rich or poor, expatriate or belonger, what they dispense ceases to be justice. When justice is for sale and when laws are implemented and made retroactive, arguably in an effort to secure particular convictions, the justice system and the system of justice is being challenged and democracy is under siege.
On the issue of taxation without representation, the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands by its duly elected Parliamentarians have just recently unanimously voted in support of an ordinance to repeal the Value Added Tax Ordinance that was passed by the Interim Administration and that is scheduled to come into force on April 1st of this year. The unanimity of the vote to repeal the VAT Ordinance, did not come as a surprise, as both political parties campaigned against its immediate implementation and sought its delay in order to allow the elected Government to explore alternative measures. We have made representations to the effect that VAT is not in the best interest of a small economy such as ours and have provided sound alternative revenue generating measures. While we maintain that VAT will not work in the Turks and Caicos Islands, we are more concerned, as you can see, that the principle of Democracy and Good Governance, which mandates that the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands through their elected officials, must have an opportunity to consider any measure that seeks to impose an additional tax burden on them or to otherwise alter their tax structure, is a principle that is being sacrificed on the altar of despotism. If His Excellency The Governor refuses to assent to the repeal bill, he would have said in no uncertain terms that the voice of the people is the voice of God, only so long as God and the United Kingdom Government are singing in chorus. I cannot stress with sufficient strength nor overstate the significance of these events. The question is not one of taxation, but rather, one of democracy.
An additional insult to the democratic process, is the continued presence of a UK appointed CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, whose office controls government expenditure without the authority of the elected Minister of Finance. Friends, imagine if you could, an elected Government unable to give a clear undertaking to the works because this strange, unelected creature, the CFO, is deciding upon the operations of Government without the authority of the Minister of Finance.
Your Excellency, Ministerial Government in the Turks and Caicos Islands is not yet 40 years old – younger in fact, than the treaty of Chaguaramas. In that time, we have by any standards, made significant strides and by the same token, we have made mistakes. Your Excellency, fellow heads of Government, I assure you that the Government of the Turks and Caicos Islands has constantly under review, the successes and failures of those Governments that came before us. We will not be afraid to emulate the actions that lead to successes and avoid those that lead to failures. I wish also to assure you, that so long as I am entrusted with the office of Premier, I will stand in opposition to any individual or group of individuals, whose purpose it is to reverse the social, political and economic gains of past governments.
On February 10th 2013, moved by dismay over the constant infractions of democratic principles and insults to the ideals of elected government, I caused a letter to be forwarded to the First Secretary of State, The Rt. Hon. William Hague, MP – Minister of Foreign Affairs – requesting the recall with immediate effect, of the UK appointed dignitaries responsible for these infractions, namely His Excellency the Governor, the Attorney General and the Chief Financial Officer.
For some time Your Excellency, perhaps blinded by the euphoria of success, the Turks and Caicos Islands may not have been as public in its support for CARICOM as it could have been. We may not have been as bold as we could have been in championing the ideals of the Community. We may have failed to look within the region for the assistance in strengthening our institutions and building our democracy. The Turks and Caicos Islands have a vested interest in CARICOM, not least because we have living and working among us, citizens from perhaps every member and associate member of the Community. Your Excellency, please know that the Government of the Turks and Caicos Islands is committed to this region as we strive to build our small nation.
Even as I make public my Government’s commitment to the Caribbean Community, I want to make clear that that commitment is not at the expense of our willingness to continue work with the United Kingdom Government. The Government of the United Kingdom must by now realize that the Turks and Caicos is not prepared “to go along”, with all that they propose just “to get along”. The Partnership only works, if, notwithstanding our status as overseas territories, Her Majesty’s Government recognizes that we also carry the mandate of a constituency, whose interest we have a duty to represent.
In the words of Sir Lynden Pindling “We (the Government), must take the worst and make them Better. We must take the lowest and take them Higher. We must take the saddest and make them Happier. We must take the sickest and make them Healthier and we must take the poorest and make them Richer.” I have no doubt that all the Governments represented here today subscribe to that vision. It was that vision that propelled Toussaint L’Ouverture in to action. That vision drove Eric Williams, Alexander Bustamante, Forbes Burnham, Errol Barrow, Lynden Pindling and a slew of others, to challenge the status quo. So too, are the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands Inspired.
Your Excellency, There has always been a commitment in CARICOM for democratic values and a concern for basic human rights. CARICOM has never been afraid to condemn any circumstance that is an affront to democracy or denies the basic human rights to any people. In this regard we wish to thank the Community for its pronouncements thus far.
The current state of affairs in the Turks and Caicos Islands has the potential to throw our Country into chaos. For so long as I am the leader and principal spokesman of the Government of the Turks and Caicos Islands, I will use every means available to me to ensure that does not happen.
Today therefore, on behalf of the Government and peoples of the Turks and Caicos Islands, I am calling on the Community and the individual member states, to keep the situation in the Turks and Caicos Islands under review. I urge you to stand with us, not on one or other specific policy, but on the question of democracy. I invite you, to advocate on the international stage for the full restoration of the institutions of true democracy in our islands and to support our cries for removal of the spectre of colonial influences of the past, as we fight for our rights on our journey towards true self governance and self determination.
On behalf of the people of The Turks and Caicos Islands, I thank you.

20130219-210839.jpg