Until 2025, our understanding of “constitutional” was influenced by our awareness of the US Constitution. Its elegant simplicity enabled most anyone to say if something sounded “constitutional” or not. And it seems most of us assume our constitution enshrines the same rights as theirs. But lately theirs seems less reassuring than ours, which is a serious commentary on one’s community.
The First Amendment of the US Constitution
One of the most cited – and like our Sections 10, 11 and 12 – is the First Amendment to the US Constitution. It states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”[1]
Whereas our constitution allows future laws to limit such rights, like our first and second GST laws. They allow for searches without warrants, to being forced to testify against oneself, and take an oath against one’s will.[2] Fortunately, GST laws did not forbid our freedom of speech or the press to report on how GST was passed, despite our petitions – or the GST march.[3] But where would we be if they had?
Commentary: Protection of freedom of expression
If we continue examining our 1982 Order, Section 11 boldly begins: “11.(1) Except with his own consent, no person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his freedom of expression, and… said freedom includes the freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference, and freedom from interference with his correspondence and other means of communication.” (e.g., writing and reading this article!) Then 11(2) says, but for, “…the authority of any law [that] makes provision… in the interests of defence, public safety, public order, public morality or public health;” Wait. By whose standards? And, 11(2)(b) adds guardrails, “…for the purpose of protecting the reputations, rights and freedoms of other persons or the private lives of persons concerned in legal proceedings,” and for privacy, “preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence…” [4]
But then, it allows for, “maintaining the authority and independence of the courts or regulating telephony, telegraphy, posts, wireless, broadcasting or television;”[4] That means the court could reverse the ruling on “Talk Your Mind”[5] and never run afoul of our constitution! But it concludes regarding restrictions on public officers if they are, “…shown to be reasonably justifiable in a democratic society.” [4] Hmm. Another commentary on one’s community.
Community: Protection of freedom of assembly and association
Communal expression follows in Section 12—(1) “Except with his own consent, no person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his freedom of peaceful assembly and association, that is to say, his right peacefully to assemble freely and associate with other persons and in particular to form or belong to trade unions or other associations for the protection of his interests” which the US amendment said simply as, “right of the people peaceably to assemble”. [1,4] One might also consider a peaceful protest as the “protection of one’s interests” – and might consider the GST petitions expressing outrage at its undemocratic passage and speed of signing the law as “communication” ? as afforded in Section 11.
Section 12 (2) continues, as no one shall be “required as a condition of employment to subscribe to any organisation for membership or admission; nor shall any person be required to pay dues or other compensation to secure or enjoy such employment or the right thereto; not* shall any person be prohibited from free access to his place of employment or return therefrom by virtue of his failure to belong or subscribe to any organisation.” So we had labour legislation in our constitution! [*and a typo]
However, Clause (3) then wraps itself with exceptions for future laws. It also states that one’s right to work without a union did not outlaw trade unions or activities that limit freedom to pursue a trade – “…unless that provision is contained in a written law…[or] … shown to be reasonably justifiable in a democratic society.” [4] Yet another serious commentary on one’s community.
Nepal Negating Rights for “National Interest”
In September, the government of Nepal passed registration regulations for social media platforms, and “deactivated” 26 noncompliant sites. Communications disruptions led to outrage. When protestors attempted to storm parliament, it was not exactly “peaceful assembly.” However, “Police responded with deadly and allegedly indiscriminate force…” killing 19 and injuring over 200. And now, “A series of draft bills governing press freedom and social media are under debate in Nepal’s parliament that could mean people are fined or jailed for content that is deemed against the ‘national interest’, and could … shut down newspapers and revoke the licences of journalists.”[6] Could similar laws to erode our rights?
Peruvian Protests, Police and Patrols
Another example of constitutional conflict emerged in October when police shot a popular rapper during a protest in Peru. A young organiser asserted that, “We have the constitutional right to protest…That right cannot be taken away from us by a police commander, a congressman – and certainly not by someone who pretends to be president…” However, the government had declared a state of emergency that “restricts freedom of movement and assembly” and allowed both police and the armed forces to patrol the streets.[7] Such constitutional rights were irrelevant for that rapper.
Constitutional Rights Challenging Constitutional Ruin
On October 11, more than 2,500 “No Kings” protests spanned 50 US states when more than 8 million Americans peacefully demonstrated against a president acting like a king. That is, like the one they had before independence and thankfully not like ours now. Donning absurd and playful costumes, street protestors’ signs included the preamble to the US Constitution, and millions more were honking car horns.[8,9] Ironically, they exercised their rights to protest the denial of others’ rights.
A Commentary on One’s Community
These events offer a serious commentary on each community, because a “community” reflects how people cooperate with one another to create “a democratic society”. Recent changes in the US are highlighting that the rights enshrined in our constitution, or any other, are only as binding and relevant as we, the People, want and trust our government to allow them to be.
Notably, exceptions for future laws in our constitution open the doors to the abuses happening in Nepal and Peru, as just two of countless historic examples. As such, “defence, public safety, public order, public morality or public health” might echo “content that is deemed against the ‘national interest’” while Peru is gripped by a state of emergency to restore public safety and order. And in the US, executive orders have bypassed laws entirely. So, for now, let us be thankful that the GST laws did not prohibit our right to free expression or peaceful assembly and association. But where would we be if they had?
Repeal GST – and pass a balanced budget bill. Now.
This article reflects issues raised on July 5, 2021, at the House Select Committee on GST Public Hearing.
[1]https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/bill-of-rights-transcript; [2] Goods and Services and General Services Acts, 2021 and 2025;[3] https://www.284media.com/regional/2022/07/01/anguilla-over-80-businesses-close-in-protest-and-defiance-of-the-impending-implementation-of-the-goods-and-services-tax-act-being-pushed-by-the-government-of-anguilla/; [4]The Anguilla Constitution Order 1982; [5] https://anguillabar.com/index.php/2013/04/12/special-court-sitting-anguilla-circuit-honours-john-benjamin-qc-at-the-inner-bar/; [6] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/08/nepal-bans-26-social-media-sites-including-x-whatsapp-and-youtube; [7] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/oct/25/peru-youth-protesters-state-of-emergency-gen-z; [8] https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/18/us/protests-trump-no-kings.html?unlocked_article_code=1.wE8.vcO-.eUW9wUZniQxN&smid=url-share; [9] https://www.facebook.com/AltUSNationalParkService/posts/our-confirmed-count-stands-at-81-million-participants-worldwide-for-yesterdays-n/1233293442174179/
