Draft of 11 April 2016
The independence of India in 1947 brought an end to the British Empire. The King ceased to call himself “Emperor”. Britain began to shed her no longer profitable colonies. The islands of the West Indies were ushered into a pre-independence state as the West Indies Federation. This was short-lived. With its dissolution in 1962, the islands reverted to colonial status for a short period. Jamaica, Trinidad, and Barbados went into independence as separate states. Britain kept the pressure up on the smaller islands to go into independence. She agreed with the Leeward and Windward Islands to the creation of Statehood in Association with Britain, envisaged as a first step to independence. This relationship gave the Associated States full internal self-government, with Britain reserving only defence and external affairs.
During 1966, a new Constitution for the creation of the Associated State of St Kitts, Nevis and Anguilla was discussed in London. Against the background of Anguilla’s persistent demand for a break from St Kitts, one of the proposals discussed was the establishment of local government in Anguilla. The St Kitts delegation agreed that the 1967 Constitution should contain a provision for Anguilla, and Nevis, to enjoy a degree of local government. The fear in Anguilla was that the St Kitts government never had any intention of permitting the Anguillians any real degree of internal self-government. This concern led to the mounting of a campaign in Anguilla against Statehood. It was led by such men as Ronald Webster, Atlin Harrigan, and John Rogers.
Anguilla Revolution
Despite the objections of the Anguillians, on 26 February 1967 the colony of St Kitts, Nevis and Anguilla became an Associated State. The following day, 27 February 1967, the Constitution of the Associated State came into effect. Anguilla refused to accept this status, and the Anguilla Revolution of 1967 commenced. On 8 March, Government House at Landsome burned to the ground and the Warden fled to St Kitts the following day.
On 29 May at a meeting in the Park, the crowd voted by a show of hands to expel the St Kitts policemen from the island. The crowd left the Park in procession and marched to Police Headquarters where they ordered the police to leave Anguilla by 10:00 am the following day. The following morning the policemen were advised that a plane was ready to take them to St Kitts, and by noon they were all disarmed and expelled from Anguilla.
The Peace-keeping Committee
On 31 May 1967, a Peace-keeping Committee was established to manage the island’s affairs. The same day, a delegation was sent to St Kitts to search for a peaceful solution. They presented a memorandum to the Governor which read in part:
Anguillians do not want to be a part of the State of St Christopher-Nevis-Anguilla. The time when they might have accepted this is past. What they now want is separation from St Kitts. They want a process set in motion now which will give them separation and self-determination within twelve months. By the end of this time they want to be a State in Association with Britain.
Attack on St Kitts
The response of the St Kitts government was immediate. A state of emergency was declared and regional governments were requested to send military assistance to put down the rebellion. The Anguilla Revolution was well under way. The Anguillians took the view that the best form of defence was attack. In the early hours of the morning of 10 June, a party of armed Anguillians landed in St Kitts and attacked the Police Headquarters, the Defence Force Headquarters, and the power station. The attack was a failure due to the small size of the Anguillian force, and the non-occurrence of the promised uprising by Kittitians against their own government. Nonetheless, the attack served Anguilla well in that the St Kitts Defence Forces concentrated on the defence of St Kitts, and never mounted an attack on Anguilla in response.
Referendum on Secession
The St Kitts government insisted that the Anguilla Revolution had no legitimacy and was not supported by the majority of residents. The response of the Peace-keeping Committee was to hold a referendum on secession from St Kitts on 11 July 1967. The result was an overwhelming vote (1,813 to 5) in favour of secession.
The First Constitution.
A further step towards legitimising the Revolution was the preparation of a Constitution. Dr Roger Fisher, a professor of law at Harvard University, agreed to help. He drafted an eleven-section Constitution which provided for the creation of an Anguilla Council with full legislative and executive powers. There were to be five elected and two nominated members.
The First Anguilla Council
The Fisher Constitution appointed the first members of the Council who were to hold office until elections could be held not later than July 1968. They were Ronald Webster, Rev Leonard Carty, John Webster, John Rogers, Peter Adams, Walter Hodge, Emile Gumbs, and John Hodge.
The Second Anguilla Council
While the Caribbean governments fussed and disagreed among themselves on the best way to resolve the Anguilla crisis, the Anguillians went about preparing for the first elections under their new Constitution. The Beacon Newspaper of 7 October 1967 published a notice advising the electorate that nomination day was fixed for 17 October and that elections were scheduled for 25 October. All Anguillians holding foreign passports were specifically allowed to vote, and civil servants were allowed to contest a seat. When nominations closed on 17 October, five of Ronald Webster’s candidates stood unopposed. Camile Connor and Charles Fleming withdrew from the contest. The five remaining candidates were declared to be duly elected Councillors. They were Ronald Webster, Wallace Rey, Hugo Rey, Collins Hodge, and John Hodge.
When the new Council met on 21 October, Ronald Webster was elected Chairman and Campbell Fleming and John Rogers were named as Nominated Members. At a meeting at the Park the following day, Mr Webster told the crowd that Anguilla was looking for some sort of associated status with Britain or some other Commonwealth country. He emphasised that, “Total independence is only a last resort if all negotiations fail.”
The United Nations
The Anguillian leaders were also interested in some form of relationship with the United Nations. Professor Fisher wrote a letter of 24 October to the Secretary General appealing for an administrator, an expert in telecommunications, and a financial adviser for Anguilla. His letter was followed up with a meeting between him and Jeremiah Gumbs and the UN Special Committee on Colonialism. The British Government took the view that the Committee of Twenty-four was incompetent to discuss the affairs of an Associated State and refused to participate in the discussions. The Committee decided to send a mission to Anguilla to investigate, but it was unable to visit because the British Government withheld consent.
Insertion of a British Advisor
On 8 January 1968, direct participation of Britain in the administration of Anguilla began with the consent of the St Kitts Government and the Anguilla Council with the arrival of Mr Tony Lee as the Senior British Official in Anguilla. This was intended to be for what was described as the Interim Period of twelve months.
The Advisory Board
In March the Anguilla Council set up an Advisory Board of fourteen members to assist with the running of the island’s affairs.
The Third Council
On 30 July 1968 new elections were held. There were seven candidates, although the Constitution provided for only five. Negotiations continued between the Anguilla Council and the British and St Kitts governments. They all failed to resolve the crisis because the Anguillians were adamant that they would accept nothing short of complete separation from St Kitts. The British government insisted that under the West Indies Act 1967 they could not change the status of any part of an Associated State without the request and consent of the State legislature.
As the end of the Interim Period approached, the Anguilla leaders were split. One faction led by Atlin Harrigan favoured retaining an association with Britain. Another led by Ronald Webster and Wallace Rey favoured a unilateral declaration of independence. The Anguilla Council appealed to the British to extend the Interim Period, but the British refused and on 9 January 1969 Mr Lee departed. The St Kitts government responded to the intransigence of the Anguillians by suspending air and postal services and banning all trade save for food-stuffs and drugs.
Unilateral Declaration of Independence
In the perceived face of rejection by the British Government, the Anguilla Council prepared to hold a referendum on independence. Jack Holcomb, a CIA agent and something of a con-man, stationed at the time in Anguilla and advising the Council, came up with a new constitution. It was duly approved by the Council and put to the people on 6 February 1969. The result was 1,739 votes in favour of independence and 4 against.
The Second Constitution
Jack Holcomb’s Republican Constitution provided for the island to be divided into three constituencies each of which would elect two candidates, and five candidates at large. The President and Vice-President were to be elected in a national election. Elections for the Legislature were to be held on 25 March 1969, while those for the President and Vice President were to be on 3 April.
The Republic of Anguilla
When nominations closed on 21 February, Ronald Webster was unopposed and was declared President of the Republic of Anguilla. He chose as his Vice-President Mr Campbell Fleming. Webster’s Cabinet was to include John Webster (a former Secretary of Defence) as Secretary of State for Domestic Affairs and Jeremiah Gumbs as Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. On nomination day only six candidates were nominated and they were similarly declared elected unopposed.
William Whitlock’s Expulsion
On 11 March 1969, a British envoy, Mr William Whitlock, arrived in Anguilla with proposals for a solution to the Anguilla crisis. His visit was spurred by a resolution passed in Trinidad at the just concluded Fifth Conference of Heads of Government of the Commonwealth Caribbean Countries. This called on Britain to take all necessary steps to confirm the territorial integrity of St Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla. The British proposal brought by Whitlock was that Anguilla should be administered by Tony Lee as Commissioner to serve for so long as the present difficult situation continued. He would appoint an Advisory Committee to assist him in his capacity as Her Majesty’s Commissioner. These proposals were unacceptable to the Anguillian leaders, and Whitlock was expelled from the island.
Operation Sheepskin
During the early hours of 19 March 1969 some three hundred British paratroopers landed, followed by Royal Engineers and London bobbies. The local defence force had handed in their arms the evening before as it had been realised that resistance would be futile and would lead to unnecessary loss of blood. The rebellion was crushed without either side firing a shot. The invading forces distributed a leaflet that contained the fateful line, “It is not our purpose to force you to return to an Administration you do not want.”
The Third Constitution
Tony Lee was appointed the first Commissioner, and Britain’s direct administration of the island began. He was appointed under an Order in Council of 18 March which authorised him to make by regulation provision for securing and maintaining public safety and public order in Anguilla as part of the Associated State. It gave him sweeping powers to amend, suspend or revoke any law in Anguilla other than the Constitution or the Courts Order. This 1969 Order was the first British Constitutional document that related specifically to Anguilla since the first day of settlement in 1650. It was Anguilla’s third modern constitution.
The Caradon Declaration
Tony Lee’s administration was not without opposition. There were several large demonstrations on the island demanding the withdrawal of British forces. Webster and the other leaders refused to cooperate with Lee. Representations were made to the United Nations. In an effort to defuse a highly explosive situation, the British Government dispatched its Ambassador to the United Nations, Lord Caradon, to Anguilla to work out an arrangement with the Anguilla Council. The result was the Caradon Declaration which was agreed upon by the Council. It provided for the administration of the island to be conducted by the Commissioner in full consultation and co-operation with the representatives of the people of Anguilla.
The results of the 1969 elections were abandoned. The members of the 1968 Third Anguilla Council were recognised as the elected representatives and were to serve as members of the Council. The Declaration repeated that it was no part of the purpose of the British Government to put the Anguillians under an Administration under which they did not want to live. After initial difficulties with establishing working relationships, Tony Lee left Anguilla on 20 April to be replaced by John Cumber who took the important step of recognising Ronald Webster as the leader of the Council.
The Wooding Commission
On 18 December 1969 the British Government appointed a Commission of Inquiry under the chairmanship of Sir Hugh Wooding, Chief Justice of Trinidad and Tobago, to make recommendations for a satisfactory and durable solution to the Anguilla Crisis. By its terms of reference, The Commission was expressly required to find a solution that would “preserve the integrity of the State and prevent further fragmentation of the Caribbean”. Not surprisingly, the Commission’s Report concluded that while reversion to colonial status was out of the question, independence for such a small community was equally unrealistic. The only solution that could be recommended was the preservation of the State under an arrangement which gave the Anguillians a large measure of control over their own affairs. The Anguilla Council immediately passed a resolution rejecting the Report. They would accept nothing less than a complete break with St Kitts.
The Godber Proposals
With a change in government in London in 1971, the British Government gradually became more sympathetic to the Anguillian cause, and the Wooding Report became a dead letter. In July 1971, Joseph Godber, the new Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, put to the St Kitts Government a proposal that the State Government delegate to HMG powers which would enable the Commissioner to administer the island for a period of years. The St Kitts Government insisted that the Anguillians were rebels and the British must force them back into the fold of St Kitts-Nevis-Anguilla. Gun-boats should be sent to do this and measures should be taken to starve the islanders into submission. On the other hand, the Anguillians were prepared to accept nothing short of complete separation from the Associated State. The British were forced to act unilaterally. Their proposals for an interim settlement were accepted by the Anguilla Council. In the words of Ronald Webster, “Anguillians have just accepted Britain to be their partner to work together from now onwards . . . let us move forward together to develop Anguilla.”
Reversion to British Administration
Purporting to act under the authority of the West Indies Act 1967, the British Parliament passed the Anguilla Act 1971 to allow it to administer Anguilla. The Act took effect on 27 July 1971. It permitted the Queen in Council to make detailed provision for the administration of Anguilla. HMG was to appoint a Commissioner in Anguilla. The island would cease to be a part of the Associated State in the event of the introduction into the State’s legislature of a Bill for a law terminating the status of association with the UK. The St Kitts Government never accepted that this was a legitimate use of section 3 of the West Indies Act.
The decision of the British Government to proceed unilaterally in this way met with strong condemnation from Caribbean Governments and newspapers. Their reaction prompted the leader of the Anguilla Council, Ronald Webster, to publish a letter in The Times newspaper urging the “Commonwealth Caribbean countries not to interfere in a situation which does not concern them and towards the solution of which they have made no worthwhile contribution.”
TO BE CONTINUED NEXT WEEK
The Fourth Constitution
Anguilla’s fourth modern Constitution was the Anguilla (Administration) Order 1971. It made provision for the Commissioner to work in consultation with the Anguilla Council. This was to consist of seven elected members and up to six nominated members. The role of the Council was not spelled out in the Order, and the Commissioner was vested with complete legal control of the island. Mr Godber gave the Anguillians the assurance that the constitutional arrangements would be reviewed after three years. Anguillians accepted the Order as a temporary settlement even though it was within the framework of the Associated State. They recognised that it was setting the stage for the eventual separation of Anguilla from the rest of the State.
The Anguilla Council of 1972
The first general elections under the Administration Order took place on 24 July 1972. The result was the election of the fourth and last Anguilla Council. Their complete lack of power caused them to go on strike against the Commissioner. The situation was diffused by introducing a committee system whereby certain members of the Council became chairmen of departmental committees. However, when after three years the promised constitutional review did not take place, the Council went on strike again (for a period of fourteen months). Only when the British Government agreed to constitutional concessions did the Council resume work.
The Fifth Constitution
In 1976, Anguillians began to be governed under a new Constitution. It had been negotiated by the Anguilla Council with representatives of the British Government during the “strike” of the previous year. It came into effect on 10 February 1976, and was Anguilla’s fifth Constitution of the modern era. It provided for the first time for a Ministerial form of government. The Executive Council comprised a Chief Minister and two other ministers and two ex-officio members, the Attorney-General and the Financial Secretary. It was chaired by the Commissioner. There was provision for a Legislative Assembly comprising the Commissioner as Speaker, three ex-officio members, namely the Chief Secretary, the Financial Secretary, and the Attorney-General, and not less than seven elected and two nominated members. The Commissioner was to consult with Executive Council in the formulation of policy and the exercise of all powers conferred upon him by the Constitution. However, he was not obliged to consult with respect to external affairs or internal security, nor on matters relating to the public service. This system extended to the local representatives some of the forms of power while ensuring that the British official retained the substance of power. As Petty puts it in his Where There’s a Will There’s a Way, “The Anguillians had fought for direct British Colonialism and they got it in heavy doses.” The 1976 Constitution recognised Anguilla to be still a part of the Associated State of St Kitts, Nevis and Anguilla. However, it was to be separately administered by Britain until such time as the constitutional crisis between Anguilla and the rest of the State could be resolved.
General elections under the 1976 Constitution were held on 15 March 1976. Mr Webster was named Chief Minister, with Emile Gumbs and Albena Lake-Hodge his two ministers. Hubert Hughes was the lone opposition member. By early 1977 Mr Webster had lost the confidence of his government, and when at a 1 February 1977 meeting of the Legislative Assembly Mr Hughes introduced a motion of no confidence only Mr Webster did not support it. The Commissioner revoked Mr Webster’s appointment. Due to the short period that had passed since the previous elections, and because the majority of the Assembly supported the appointment of Emile Gumbs, the Commissioner did not call new elections, but instead appointed Emile Gumbs to be the new Chief Minister. This government lasted until the general elections of 28 May 1980 when Mr Webster and his supporters won six of the seven seats, only Emile Gumbs of the previous administration retaining his seat.
The Anguilla Act 1980
In February 1980, the St Kitts Labour Party administration of Premier Lee Moore was defeated at the polls. The new premier, Dr Kennedy Simmonds, made it clear that his administration would put no obstacle in the way of change in Anguilla and the Anguillians should be free to decide their own constitutional future. The result was the Anguilla Act 1980 which empowered Her Majesty to separate Anguilla from the State on a day appointed by Order in Council. The Anguilla (Appointed Day) Order duly appointed 19 December 1980 as the day on which Anguilla ceased to be a part of the territory of the Associated State of St Christopher, Nevis and Anguilla. The 1980 Anguilla Act is typical of the statutory provisions which enable modern colonial government by the UK Government. It permits the Privy Council to make Orders in Council for Anguilla, and for Anguilla to be given independence whenever its people so request without further involvement of the British Parliament.
Mr Webster’s government of May 1980 lasted for barely a year before internal dissension brought it down. After a short period of political instability, he advised the Commissioner to dissolve the Assembly and to hold general elections on 22 June 1981. Mr Webster won his seat and had the support of four of the newly elected representatives. The Commissioner asked him to form the new government. One of the objectives of the new government was to negotiate with the British Government for constitutional advance. Mr Webster was particularly concerned to ensure that the Constitution said that in the event of another vote of no confidence the Commissioner could not appoint a new Chief Minister but must call general elections.
The possibility of constitutional advance was limited in view of the position of the British Government that if a territory aspired to autonomy it must call for independence and set a timetable. It was made clear that Associated Statehood was out of the question, and that any aspiration to such a status would be considered only in the framework of a call for independence.
The Sixth Constitution
There was no public consultation before the replacement of the 1976 Constitution agreed to in secret by the Anguilla Government. The new Constitution came into effect on 1 April 1982 barely a week after it was first seen by the public. This process stands condemned as one of the most egregious acts of disdain by both the local government and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office for public opinion in Anguilla. It is Anguilla’s sixth modern Constitution. The position of Commissioner was renamed “Governor” and the Legislative Assembly now became the “House of Assembly”. Additionally, the Commissioner (Governor) ceased to sit as a member of the House of Assembly and the Speaker of the House was chosen by the House and not by the Governor. By one view, the 1982 Constitution contains only minor changes to the 1976 Constitution. Another view criticises it as the abandonment of our previous system of full internal self-government, and a craven submission to naked colonial administration.
The 1982 Constitution left the Governor’s reserved powers virtually intact, though he was now required to consult the Chief Minster on matters relating to internal security and the public service. The Governor also had reserve power to legislate and to administer in case public order has broken down and a state of emergency exists.
Anguilla Constitution (Amendment) Order 1990
In line with local demands for increased autonomy, and after the new 1982 Constitution had been working for only three years, on 2 August 1985 the House of Assembly passed a motion for the Governor to set up a Constitution Review Committee. This Committee was appointed by the Governor in October 1985. The result of the work of this Committee was the Anguilla Constitution (Amendment) Order 1990. It provided for the creation of the office of Leader of the Opposition and alteration of the definition of Belonger Status. The 1982 Constitution as amended is the Constitution under which Anguilla is governed to this day.
Anguillians appeared by and large satisfied that the 1982 Constitution gave them what they want: a degree of autonomy, with external forces at hand (in the form of a British warship) for the defence of the island, and its representation overseas by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. The utility of a British passport to facilitate international travel, study, and work is generally appreciated. Interest in discussing reform is limited to politicians, lawyers and a few others who take a special interest in these matters.
Partnership for Progress
In 1992, the new Labour administration in London set about making new proposals for the relationship of the UK with the Overseas Territories. In March 1999, the British Government published its Partnership for Progress Report. This was a major policy document that set out the parameters of the relationship. The Secretary of State reiterated the four principles that underlie the partnership as:
First, our partnership must be founded on self-determination . . .
Second, the partnership creates responsibilities on both sides . . .
Third, the people of the Overseas Territories must exercise the greatest possible control over their own lives . . .
Fourth, Britain will continue to provide help to the Overseas Territories that need it . . .
One of the principal outcomes of the Report was the renaming of British Dependent Territories citizenship as British Overseas Territories citizenship, and the grant to all BOT citizens of full British citizenship. The Report makes it clear that Britain’s links to the Territories should be based on a partnership, with obligations and responsibilities on both sides.
Chapter 2 of the Partnership for Progress Report sets out the rationale for constitutional review at this time:
The governance of the territories must have a firm basis. Democracy, human rights and the rule of law are all as relevant in the Overseas Territories as elsewhere. The principles which should underlie modern constitutions are clear. There must be a balance of obligations and expectations, and both should be clearly and explicitly set out.
In March of 2000, there were general elections in Anguilla. The party that came to power was the Anguilla United Front (AUF). In its manifesto it had made a number of promises that involved constitutional reform. These included abolishing the nominated members, increasing the number of ministers, reviewing the provisions for the exercise of responsible government and ministerial authority by elected members, reviewing the policy and law relating to “belongership”, developing codes of conduct for politicians, ministers and members of the Assembly, creating the office of Ombudsman, etc. All these matters involved some sort of constitutional change.
The David Carty Report
In June 2000, the new AUF Government appointed Mr David Carty to lead a committee to further the party’s promise of constitutional reform contained in its manifesto. Mr Carty selected a number of island luminaries and intellectuals to assist him in the preliminary work of heightening awareness of constitutional issues in the Anguillian community. Mr Carty eventually published a report, but nothing tangible came of it.
The 2006 Commission
In January 2006, a Constitutional and Electoral Reform Commission was set up by the Governor in Council. The Commission produced a Report in August recommending a number of changes and modernizations to the Constitution.
The 2006 Report was considered by a Chief Minister’s Committee of all the elected members of the House of Assembly and a number of recommendations for accepting the Report with alterations were made, but the Report never made it to the House of Assembly, and very little tangible came of it. At the last meeting of the Chief Minister’s Committee, the Chairman of the Commission and Mrs Lolita Richardson were asked to draft a Constitution that would show how the recommendations would be given effect.
The Mitchell draft
In March 2008, the Chairman of the Chief Minister’s Committee circulated his draft of the proposed new Constitution based on the 2006 Report.
Lolita Richardson’s draft
Mrs Richardson circulated a draft Constitution in mid-2009. Her draft made significant alterations to the recommendations of the 2006 Commission which had not been approved by the Chief Minister’s Committee. The draft was never discussed by the Chief Minister’s Committee. By the time it was circulated, the island’s attention was consumed by the approaching general elections. Indeed, the Committee never met again after her draft was produced, and interest in constitutional reform abated.
Rev John Gumbs’ draft
The opposition party, the Anguilla United Movement (AUM) headed by Mr Hubert Hughes, won the 2010 elections and Mr Osborne Fleming’s party went into opposition. On 7 October 2012, Mr Hughes appointed Rev John Gumbs to head a committee to make recommendations for constitutional advancement based on the work of the previous Committee and Commission. Later that year, Rev Gumbs’ Committee submitted a draft Constitution to Chief Minister Hughes. It incorporated many of the changes proposed by the 2008 Mitchell draft, but it provided for the island to become fully independent. The Report of the 2006 Commission did not indicate any public support for independence, and did not recommend any immediate steps to seeking independence. This draft was never publicly circulated by the AUM government or debated in any forum.
Rev Dr Clifton Niles’ draft Constitution
At some point in 2012, Chief Minister Hubert Hughes appointed Rev Dr Clifton Niles to head a new Constitutional and Electoral Reform Committee. This Committee submitted to Mr Hughes another draft Independence Constitution, but this draft, like Rev Gumbs’, was never circulated or discussed in public. The question of seeking political independence had not been previously debated in Anguilla and appeared to have no widespread public support. The members of Dr Niles’ Committee published a letter in the press dissenting from Dr Niles’ proposals for the draft Constitution, which they claimed did not represent their views.
The 2015 Constitutional and Electoral Reform Committee
In March 2015, the AUF Party, under the leadership of Mr Victor Banks, won a majority of seats in the House of Assembly in general elections of that year. The AUF’s political manifesto included a promise to move for political advancement for Anguilla by way of constitutional and electoral reform within the first two years after coming to office. The party’s Manifesto did not mention or raise the issue of political independence for Anguilla.
In September 2015, Executive Council took the decision to appoint a core constitutional and electoral reform committee, with power to co-opt, and charged to make recommendations with respect to constitutional and electoral reform and to implement the necessary work, and to deliver a preliminary progress report to Executive Council by December 2015. The work was to be done in step with the separate work already being undertaken in relation to electoral reform. Letters of invitation to join the committee went out signed by Mrs Cora Richardson-Hodge, Minister of Home Affairs.
The Committee met and at its first meeting decided that it was not representative of the views and interests of a sufficiently wide cross-section of Anguilla and agreed to request the Minister of Home Affairs to invite a number of other persons to join the Committee as full members. The Minister as requested wrote letters to all political parties and senior lawyers on the island inviting them to join the Committee. In December 2015, the Committee duly presented its first preliminary report to Executive Council.
The Committee’s work continues. It meets bi-monthly, and has made progress in reviewing the previous Reports and draft Constitutions. As of the date of writing, the Committee is working on putting together a discussion draft Constitution to take to the public to obtain their views. The Committee expects to be able to report to Executive Council before the end of 2016. This should place Government in a good position to hold to its election promise of constitutional reform within the first two years of taking office.
Dated 4 April 2016
