![\"\"](\"http:\/\/dominicanewsonline.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/10\/dual-citizen.jpg\" "\\"dual")
Aware of the need for constructive, national dialogue on the niggling issue of the participation of individuals with dual citizenship in our development process particularly at the level of parliament, I submitted a personal comment on the subject matter which was published on the DNO website on October 20th 2011.<\/p>\n
The piece was designed more to stimulate discussion with a view to not only keeping the subject on the front burner of national dialogue but also at raising the discussions above the political mudslinging. I truly anticipated the public\u2019s response including the diaspora. True to expectation, there was some reaction. I thank those who commented on the submission even though they may have questions about a particular statement that was made. I am grateful too for the kind words. Please let us continue to debate and discuss the issue.<\/p>\n
Two days or so after the piece was published a prominent Dominican in the diaspora, Dr. Emmanuel Finn penned his own thoughts and caused the same to be published on DNO as well. I do not know whether he saw my piece or even read it before he made his submission, but clearly, judging from the presentation, he does not come across as someone who is interested in assisting to raise the public dialogue from the crass partisan positions that have bedeviled the same to date.<\/p>\n
In fact he appears to be more interested in the outcome of the ongoing court case against Prime Minister Roosevelt Skerrit and Hon. Petter St. Jean. He wants the court to behave in a particular way and unless it does so then \u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026.,\u2026\u2026\u2026.. oh my! God knows what.<\/p>\n
According to Dr. Finn, the court would have dispensed a significant misjudgment on jurisprudence in Dominica if it ruled again the petitioners (Messrs Ron Green and Maynard Joseph). That appears to be what is occupying his thoughts and therefore seriously clouding his view on the matter of dual citizenship and its place in our development process.<\/p>\n
Compare Dr. Finn\u2019s article with that of Reverend William Watty, one of Dominica\u2019s foremost independent thinkers which was published in the Sun Newspaper on Monday October 24th 2011. Whilst Dr. Watty referenced his arguments on the ongoing court matter he did not stop there. In fact he went on to identify the weakness in the constitution and also to make a very forceful and what I consider an impassioned plea for immediate remedial action on the matter, failing which we would be short changing in our responsibilities as a people to properly order the development process.<\/p>\n
In particular, Rev. Watty advanced the view that the specific provision in the constitution dealing with the topic should be revised to eliminate any doubts or second guessing about the real intentions of the forefathers when they drafted the document which is to limit participation in Dominica\u2019s parliamentary business only to those without dual citizenship – period. We do not have to agree with all of his opinions, but I see a clear demonstration of where the discussion ought to go. Let all ideas contend.<\/p>\n
Whatever the court\u2019s ruling in the ongoing subject, it will not solve the vexing issue of whether we ought to provide for the participation of Dominicans with dual nationalities in our parliamentary system of governance. This to my mind is the greater, more encompassing concern that has to feature in our political discussion. The court should be allowed to settle the present issue as it has the mandate and capability to do just that. We should not by inference, innuendo or straight talking begin to cast aspersions on the court system long before it settles with a decision. Clearly there were sufficient arguments on either side of the matter for the court to spend almost two weeks listening to arguments as presented by two very experienced and learned attorneys.<\/p>\n
The High Court is the institution that was designed by our fore fathers to interpret the provisions of the constitution when such disagreement arises. Our selfish motives and great capacity to argue moral and ethical values as well as present political arguments are not what will decide the case. There are rules that have been established in law for litigation which must be followed. In order words, political, ethical, moral and partisan arguments as are freely aired in the media are not entertained in our system of jurisprudence. So, by Job, let us stick to the existing rules of court procedures and allow the court do its work. The court will decide one way or another. If we seek the intervention of the court, we would have recognized the system by which the court functions and so we must allow the court to do its work<\/p>\n
I do not know if Dr. Finn has dual citizenship but the question that must be answered, even after the court case is settled is, Should we or shouldn\u2019t we create the opportunities for people like Dr. Emmanuel Finn and others to participate in the political process in Dominica at the level of parliament and government? That is the issue. It will not be settled if the court orders a bye-election in the La Plaine constituency and removes Hon. Roosevelt Skerrit as Parliamentary Representative for Veille Case and then hand the seat to Maynard Joseph, the elections petitioner. Nor will the issue be settled if the court rules that the petitioners (Ron Green and Maynard Joseph) did not or could not prove their case.\u00a0 The outcome of this matter (at the High Court or Court of Appeal) will only tell us whether the individuals in question contested the elections illegally or not. That is all. Should the discussion end there? I do not think so.<\/p>\n
Here is another impartial plea to elevate the discussion above simple partisan considerations and our frustrations over the results of the December 2009 General Elections. As a people we must clearly decide \u201cyes\u201d or \u201cno\u201d to the question. I have already advanced the view that there is room for every contending, statesman-like opinion. None should be left out of the equation. We will not settle the issue by simply pointing fingers at Prime Minister Skerrit, Mr. Petter St. Jean or for that matter Mr. Ron Green and or Maynard Joseph.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Aware of the need for constructive, national dialogue on the niggling issue of the participation of individuals with dual citizenship in our development process particularly at the level of parliament, I submitted a personal comment on the subject matter which…","protected":false},"author":15,"featured_media":47424,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_cbd_carousel_blocks":"[]","footnotes":""},"categories":[13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-47422","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-commentary"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n