The Dominica Bar Association (DBA), led by President Noelise Knight-Didier, has expressed deep disappointment over the omission of a controversial five-year absence eligibility clause in the government’s electoral reform bills now awaiting parliamentary approval. This clause, which previously required that individuals who have been absent from the country for five years or more be disqualified from the electoral roll, has been a contentious issue in discussions surrounding electoral integrity.
Speaking at a discussion organized by the Dominica Business Forum, Knight-Didier pointed to the lack of government consultations on these draft laws, which have now transitioned into bills awaiting parliamentary approval.
“When the government published those proposed draft laws, the Honorable Prime Minister indicated that there would be no further consultations,” Knight-Didier stated. “While it is commendable that the Dominica Business Forum has facilitated this consultation, we are disheartened by the government’s failure to engage with the public on these crucial changes.”
Her remarks reflect a growing sentiment among advocates for electoral reform on the island that broader public involvement is essential for the legitimacy of electoral reforms.
The DBA’s position highlights several areas of variance between the current bills and the earlier drafts proposed by Sir Denis Byron – Dominica’s sole commissioner on electoral reform – particularly regarding key issues that warrant thorough public discussion. Knight-Didier underscored that the electoral reform bills are no ordinary legislation, as they directly impact the democratic process in Dominica.
“These are bills relating to elections in our country; they deserve the utmost scrutiny and public input,” she stated.
The bar association has formally communicated its concerns to the Attorney General, noting that the current bills deviate significantly from the association’s previous submissions. Among the most contentious issues is the removal of the five-year absence clause, which Knight-Didier argues could disenfranchise resident Dominicans and potentially undermine the electoral process.
“The removal of this section has the potential to dilute the votes of those with residential ties,” she cautioned, urging for clarity on the rationale behind the changes.
Furthermore, the DBA raised alarm over the absence of detailed reports from public consultations held by the government, leaving many questions unanswered.
“We are at a loss as to why these changes were made without proper explanation,” Knight-Didier remarked, advocating for a transparent dialogue between the government and the citizens. Without such transparency, the DBA fears that the public will remain uninformed about the factors influencing these critical legislative changes.
In her address, Knight-Didier also pointed to other significant variances that have emerged in the current bills, such as the structure and composition of the Electoral Commission. The commission, as proposed in earlier drafts, included provisions to ensure diversity and representation, notably requiring at least one female member and establishing qualifications for appointments.
“These recommendations were aimed at broadening the membership base of the Electoral Commission, moving away from party political considerations. The absence of these provisions is concerning,” she stated, pointing out that such changes are vital for bolstering the integrity and independence of the commission. She argued that the government should reconsider adopting these previous recommendations.
Moreover, the DBA’s review of the bills revealed peculiar omissions in Sir Dennis Byron’s report which, according to Knight-Didier, were simple provisions aimed at ensuring that the electoral process is conducted under conditions of freedom and fairness.
“These measures are not just bureaucratic; they are fundamental to maintaining the integrity of our democracy,” Knight-Didier asserted, saying that such provisions were included in earlier drafts and should not have been discarded. “We must ensure that the voices of all Dominicans are heard and considered in shaping the laws that govern our elections. Our democracy deserves nothing less.”
It is not what Mrs Knight wants, Mrs. Knight and her group does not represent the majority views in this matter. There were public consultations and many expressed views contrary to what Mrs. Knight is now suggesting. Groups like the ERC have called for intervention by international institutions/countries to force a duly elected government to bow to their demands for electoral reform only how the want it. These groups must be reminded that in the USA, Canada and The UK there is no time limit for staying out of the country before your name can be removed from the voters list, if you are an American your ballot will be posted to any part of the world. Some states in the USA do not require picture ID to vote, as a matter of fact it is an offense in California to ask a voter for a picture ID when they turn up to vote. Well Trump might just slap a 55% tariff on Dominica if the Government fail to give UWP, ERC and Noelise Knight the election reforms they are asking for
THANK YOU NOELIZE!!!! Awesome stuff.
What is awesome about this lol, the omission of a controversial five-year absence eligibility clause. This is not unlawful and has nothing to do with election integrity as the Dominica Bar Association and others are propagandizing. Here is an interesting precedent case law regarding the matter https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2019/2019scc1/2019scc1.html. Why does the Dominica Bar Association (DBA), led by President Noelise Knight-Didier think that they have the Legal Authority to draft Laws for the
Government and that if their submissions regarding the electoral reform are not accepted accuse the Government of violating the
the electoral reform process.
The DBA is a fragmented fraternity, their input and suggestions
to the electoral reform process has been politicized and does not
hold relevance to the majority of the Dominican electorate, that is the reality.
Thank you DBA and Mrs-Knight-Didier for your observations and public engagement on this critical subject. It is understood that all of the suggestions and recommendations from various quarters will not end up in the final version. Notwithstanding, there is time for continued review, edits and consultations. I overheard Hon. Charles Maynard say ” Only a fool and a dead man is unable to change his mind!”
Let’s get Dominica’s electoral laws modernized and modelled on best practices that can be adopted across the OECS as the foundation of harmonized law.
Neolise Knight-Didier,should tell President Donald Trump,Dominicans having spent more than five years in the United States should not be deported to Dominica,as they are no longer Dominicans.
Neolise Knight-Didier does represent or talk on behalf of the majority of the people.The people believe,and rightly so there should be NO reconfirmation,no reregistration,and the 5 years should be abolished.
Actually she does. she speaks for EVERYONE who has not seen or read or fully understands the legalities of this proposed reform that Skerrit is so pwaysay all of a sudden to pass. Ask yourselves why all of a sudden? Because the proposed reforms benefit him. also there may be matters not included, like CAMPAIGN FINANCING which he refuses to touch until it is “discussed on a regional level”. As if Dominica isnt a sovereign independent state and can act on its own. Same thing he said about cannabis, not until discussed on a regional level..whole time the region had already taken a stance and 2 islands had already legalized it while he lied to us and kept info to himself. Listen not to Roosevelt Skerrit. Never or ever.
I take great exception to this foolishness and if Noelise is talking like this I fail to understand how this view, her view, became the view of the DBA.
Why are we in 2025 talking rubbish about resident dominican? and “diluting resident vote”?? There is no difrentiator where Dominican citizens are concerned. The Bar Association should clarify if Mrs. Didier gave her oppinion, or provided the legal oppinion of the Association.
Again, any bill dealing with elections that is proposed by this unscrupulous, amoral, calculating enterprise will be fraught with loopholes for corruption and manipulation to happen.
Expecting Roosevelt to do anything honest that will put his re-election in serious doubt is like expecting Satan to bruise his knees and worship God in prayer. Everything that Roosevelt does is meticulously thought out to deceive for political advantage.
Only the collective will and determination of the masses in unison on the streets will remove from his perch at the OPM. All the conversations, consultations on electoral reform were nothing but a gargantuan scam.
The voice of the DBA is not forceful and united enough to make any impact
serious difference.