Office of The Minister of Transport & Aviation P O Box N-7132, 3rd Floor, Manx Corporate Centre, West Bay Street, Nassau, Bahamas T: 1-242-397-5529 328-2701-5 322-4546 F: 328-1324 E: pompeybay@hotmail.com or barbarampinder@hotmail.com (Secretary)
PRESENTATION TO HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY BY THE HON. GLENYS HANNA MARTIN MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT FOR THE ENGLERSTON CONSTITUENCY ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION BILLS House of Assembly Nassau, Bahamas Wednesday, 6 August, 2014
Mr Speaker, I rise on behalf of Bahamians everywhere to move the second reading of –
1 of 105
1)
The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment Bill 2014
2)
The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 2014
3)
The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) (No. 3) Bill 2014
4)
The Bahamas Constitution Amendment) (No. 4) Bill
5)
The Status of Children (Amendment) Bill 2014
I again thank the good people of Englerston who have allowed me to sit in this Honourable House and to be able to stand in this place on this morning to move a second reading of these Bills.
2 of 105
Mr Speaker, I wish to begin before commencing this important debate, by first thanking the Bahamian athletes who comprised the Bahamian team and represented our country at the recent Commonwealth Games in Scotland.
Please allow me to especially commend the historic silver medal win by Arianna Vanderpool Wallace in the 50 metres butterfly swimming event and the new national record set in that event and the silver medal win of the men’s 4 x 400 metres relay team and for me, especially Chris Brown.
In
the
case
of
Arianna’s
spectacular
medal
performance, one of the daily newspapers reports that while being interviewed tears flowed and she is 3 of 105
quoted as saying she hoped that the Bahamian people will understand just how precious the moment has been for her.
#“I wanted it so badly for the Bahamas, not just for myself,” she said as her voice started to crack with emotion. “I had a chance to put the Bahamas on the map and to make people realise that we are a force to reckon with.
#“We had all of the other swimmers swimming here and doing exceptionally well, so its been a great meet for the Bahamas.” #“Thanks to everybody for their support. I’ve been getting
a
lot
of
messages,
messages and emails from people all over the world 4 of 105
that I’ve never met before, but you have been rooting for me coming from such a small country,” she summed up. “So it means a lot to me.”
Mr Speaker, we note in her comments the recurring reference to “we” and how she perceives her achievement as a collective one shared by us, the “we.”
We in this country have been watching and speaking nationally about this young woman perhaps from the days of her pre-teens: she has over the years shown such determination, audacity and courage in seeking to break new ground for our country. She has done this and Mr. Speaker, we are not talking track and
5 of 105
field, we are speaking of swimming. She is a trailblazer.
Mr Speaker, I wish also to use this moment to say a little something of Chris Brown, who, in my humble opinion, epitomizes much of what is good in our country.
Over time he has become more focused.
He has exhibited greater professional maturity. He has become more skilled in his craft, while at the same
time
honing
his
leadership
abilities,
purposefully mentoring new and up and coming athletes.
6 of 105
All the while, with each success, each groundbreaking milestone, he has maintained his humility and constantly exhibited dignity and sober pride in being Bahamian. He has become an exceedingly admirable person, indeed an inspiration
in our country’s
development.
The one constant has been the “heart” he has exhibited on the track: wearing the colours of this nation which appears as nothing more than little dots on the world globe; He has the heart of a giant: the heart of a champion which is so reflective of the spirit of the Bahamian people.
It is that same heart we see in young Arianna. 7 of 105
In the case of both Arianna and Chris Brown we know the victory is not simply personal to these individuals but are achievements made for and on behalf of the Bahamian people. That is why they speak of the “we” and not the “I.”
It is the examples of the likes of citizens such as Arianna Vanderpool Wallace and Chris Brown and the so many others in all the spheres of human endeavour, in the arts and sciences, in cultural exposition, in the daily service to our people and the greater good
that are powerful reminders and a
material reiteration that we have such a wonderful country.
8 of 105
It is no accident that
in the beginning of this
presentation I have used these two examples as a foreword to this debate on citizenship and on the men and women citizens of this country. It is intentional that I have sought to refer to that intangible that powerfully connects us as a people. I have spoken of these two incredible athletes although there are many examples in our national life.
Indeed these references are key to my case. Mr Speaker, to us, The Bahamas is special. We have our many vexing challenges
and it is
because we love and care for and greatly value this country that we do experience grave concern in the face of these challenges; however, Mr Speaker, we must always keep central to our focus that despite 9 of 105
these challenges at the core we have a great nation and a gifted people: a marvellous citizenry. And even after 41 years of Independence as we as a people seek to continue shaping our country and properly defining our national identity: we at the same time continue to ensure that our values and mores are strengthened and sustained. We endeavour to ensure a society undergirded by equity, justice and fairness and to coerce a humane society in which all of our people find a place of wholeness and peace. Mr Speaker this cannot be mere rhetoric spewed in this
Parliament
but
an
absolute
and
faithful
commitment to the healthy growth of our nation.
10 of 105
This
business
of
purposefully and
consciously
shaping and moulding and defining and refining
our
country is especially important if we reflect upon the historical evolution of this country and its people. Indeed just two days ago we commemorated the anniversary of the freeing of slaves who were descended from Africa, our ancestors, by the public holiday called Emancipation Day. At one time we diplomatically called it “August Monday” but the name “Emancipation” reiterates our journey and places a contextual reminder of our duty to be good to one another. This is not fantasy or politics or anything other than an historical fact.
11 of 105
The Debate today begins yet another critical step in the purposeful shaping of our social reality, in the pursuit of equity, fairness, justice, equality.
We are reminded too that this debate is one based on conscience.
There is no whip on any member of this House, at least not on this side of the House. Each member will speak to the Bills in accord with his or her conscience.
Mr Speaker, fundamentally the Bills before this House touch and concern two highly important and sensitive issues: that of full equality under our constitution between men and women citizens and secondly the 12 of 105
issue of citizenship itself: these two issues are largely intertwined in these Bills.
Mr. Speaker, the issue of citizenship is an extremely emotive issue: it is one that is very personal and intimate to the psychi of our people and in its impact to a country and it is a turf of which Bahamians are highly protective.
The fact, therefore that this issue is now upon the table for decision-making is a matter of great import. It is one that all Bahamians who are eligible to vote must participate in. Each voice must be heard and counted in this matter as it touches upon entrenched provisions of our
13 of 105
Constitution and goes to the core of our national reality. This is not a PLP/ FNM/ DNA moment: those moments come every 5 years and lots and lots in between. This, however, is a moment that is many ways rare and
will be of a most enduring and deeply
transformative effect.
Today begins therefore a very critical intervention in our nation’s history and in our social evolution as a people.
It is very serious business. We are today moving amendments to specific clauses of our Constitution: these are what are called “entrenched” clauses of our constitution. 14 of 105
These
are
not
ordinary
provisions
and
the
Constitution provides for an extraordinary procedure should at any time there be an effort to amend or in any way alter such entrenched provisions.
Article 54 (1) of the Constitution providesSubject to the provisions of this Article, Parliament may, by an Act of Parliament passed by both Houses, alter any of the provisions of this Constitution or (in so far as it forms part of the law of The Bahamas) any of the provisions of The Bahamas Independence Act, 1973. The Article further outlines a number of Articles in the Constitution including those under consideration today namely Articles 8, 9, 10, 14, 26 and prescribes a 15 of 105
special
procedure
for
the
alteration
of
these
provisions. The provisions mentioned relate to the transmission of citizenship (Articles 8, 9, 10, 14) and the clause prohibiting discrimination (Article 26) which is among the
protections
of
the
fundamental
rights
and
freedoms under the Constitution,
Article 54 states that where such provisions are sought to be altered as follows;A Bill for an Act of Parliament under this Article shall not be passed by Parliament unless — (i) at the final voting thereon in each House it is supported by the votes of not less than three quarters of all the members of each House; and (ii) the Bill, after its passage through both Houses 16 of 105
has been submitted to the electors qualified to vote for the election of members of the House of Assembly and, on a vote taken in such manner
as
Parliament
may prescribe
the
majority of the electors voting have approved the Bill. Our
Constitution
makes
these
provisions
“entrenched” that is that they cannot be altered by any ordinary Parliamentary process and provides that any amendment to these specific clauses must first be passed by a mandatory 3/4ths vote taken in both this House and the Senate but thereafter and further a referendum of the People must be held who will be called upon as provided for in our Constitution to vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to the proposed amendments.
17 of 105
A simple majority of voters will determine the outcome.
This extended process is therefore mandated by the Constitution as it relates to those provisions that touch upon the principles of citizenship and the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual and which are entrenched in our Constitution.
Today begins that process but in truth the process began before today.
This is not the first attempt at constitutional reform of entrenched
provisions
in
this
country
since
Independence: We will recall that in February 2002 a constitutional referendum was held to seek to alter a 18 of 105
number
of
Articles
including
the
entrenched
provisions in question today namely Articles 8 and 9 and 10 along with an array of other issues of constitutional
reform
such
as
the
Boundaries
Commission and the retirement age of judges, among other things. Mr Speaker, I have my own views as to why that effort was not successful but in the interest of avoiding controversial ground and because both sides of this House have committed to unanimity in this process to avoid a political divide as Bahamians soberly consider what is before them , I will simply quote from the Report of the Constitutional Commission which seeks to place the previous attempt in context and I quote:“It is not the place of this Commission to attempt to speculate as to the reasons for the failure of the 2002 19 of 105
national referendum.
Observers of the process,
including academics, political scientists, and voters have
referred
to
a
confluence
of
events—
contamination of the referendum by other political controversies; the imminence of a general election; decidedly mixed feelings among the electorate as to the citizenship-related aspects of the gender-equality issue; the complexity of the Bills; and the lack of public education— all of which may have played a part in varying degrees of importance. The Commission merely
records
these
observations
in
passing
because, as has been highlighted in the foreword, the 2002 referendum (as well as the more recent gambling referendum)
has
important
implications
for
the
process of constitutional reform on which we have embarked. This is particularly so when illuminated by 20 of 105
the recent response of Caribbean electorates to referenda (some of which are referred to in the body of the report). The Commission has taken onboard the lessons of these failed processes. They dare not be ignored�.
And Mr Speaker, for clarity, however, and to avoid any confusion the gambling referendum referred to in that quote was not a national constitutional referendum and was therefore not legally binding.
The national constitutional referendum which is to take place after this debate after having attained 3/4ths vote in both houses of parliament and pursuant to Article 54 of the Constitution is, however, legally binding on all and, if agreed upon by a majority 21 of 105
of the voters, will lead forthwith to an amendment to the Constitution or otherwise depending on the outcome of the vote. Amendments are to come into operation on the day of publication in the gazette of the result of the referendum showing that a majority of voters have approved the Bills. The effect will not be retroactive. This , I believe, highlights the importance of every eligible voter ensuring their voice is heard in the matter of their constitution.
I believe the point which the Commission sought to make, however, is that “process� is important in the undertaking of such an exercise especially as it relates to the Constitution and especially in relation to
22 of 105
entrenched provisions of the constitution and that the outcome prior exercises are lessons learned. Process
in
constitutional
reform
is
not
only
absolutely critical, it is mandatory.
Mr.
Speaker,
in
August
2012
a
Constitutional
Commission was appointed by the Prime Minister. In a Communication to Parliament the Prime Minister said “I wish to inform this Honourable House and the general public that my government has appointed a new
Constitutional
Commission
to
conduct
a
comprehensive review of the Constitution of The Bahamas,
and
to
recommend
changes
to
the
Constitution in advance of the 40th anniversary of Independence next year. These changes will require a 23 of 105
national referendum to be held in due course so that the will of the people can be determined on the matter.
Former Attorney-General, Sean McWeeney, QC, will be the chairman of the Constitutional Commission.
Mr.
Loren Klein, Chief Counsel in the Chambers of the Attorney-General, will, in addition to being a member, serve
as
the
technical
co-ordinator
of
the
Commission's Secretariat. The other members of the Commission will be former Attorney-General and former Minister of Education, Mr. Carl Bethel, Mrs. Rubie Nottage, Mr. Mark Wilson, Mr. Lester Mortimer, Mrs. Tara Cooper-Burnside, Mr. Michael Stevenson, Dr. Olivia Saunders, Mr. Michael Albury, Ms. Chandra Sands, Ms. Brandace Duncanson and Mrs. Carla Brown-Roker. 24 of 105
At the end of its work, almost one year later,
the
Commission produced a report which was delivered in July of last year on the nation’s 40th anniversary of Independence.
The Report describes the process undertaken by the Commission in its wide-ranging consultation with the Bahamian people.
The Commission in its Report advises that the primary source for obtaining public feedback was by way of holding public meetings, 30 meetings in all which the Report says was attended in total by some 2,183 persons. These meetings were held in Nassau and in all of the major inhabited islands of The Bahamas. 25 of 105
Additionally the Commission established a webpage on the main Government web site which established links relevant to the issues and posted written submissions for the consideration of the general public.
Further representatives of the Commission attended broadcast
and
talk
shows
to
share
pertinent
information and to receive feedback from callers. The Report indicates that the Commission invited private individuals, special interest groups and civil society generally to submit written recommendations to the Commission. The preparation for possible constitutional reform has therefore been the subject of lengthy, prolonged and 26 of 105
extensive
dialogue
approach
strategies
using and
multimedia, touching
every
diverse major
inhabited island throughout our archipelago.
Out
of
this
process
came
a
number
of
recommendations for reform and I will come later to those recommendations which form the basis of the Bills before this Honourable House today.
Mr Speaker, Our Constitution is the Supreme law of our Commonwealth.
Its contents is the product of a collective vision for our country forged by our nation’s founding fathers and concluded in December 1972 at the Bahamas Independence Conference in London, England just 27 of 105
months before our national independence on July 10 th 1973.
This independence conference followed
a General
Election in which the then government in seeking reelection campaigned upon the singular issue of national independence: Mr Speaker, the Bahamian people spoke loud and clear providing the then government with a mandate of 29 of a total of 38 seats.
The Bahamian people decided in clear terms upon a course of national sovereignty.
At that Conference in London on behalf of the Bahamian people was a group of men forming a bi28 of 105
partisan delegation and now referred to as the “framers of the constitution”.
This delegation
comprised the then Premier Lynden Pindling our nation’s first Prime Minister and today known as the father of our country and who led the government delegation of Arthur D. Hanna, Milo Butler, Carlton Francis, Clement T Maynard, Paul Adderley, George A. Smith, Loftus Roker, Philip Bethel, Cadwell Armbrister and Henry Bowen and the opposition delegation led by Kendal G. L. Isaacs and comprising Arthur
Foulkes,
Orville
Turnquest
and
Norman
Solomon. Mr Speaker it is of note that only 6 of this original 15 member delegation are alive today. . The new constitution which was concluded at that conference in December 1972, came into effect in July 29 of 105
1973 upon our national independence and it provided the legal framework for a new and sovereign Bahamas and included, inter alia, entrenched provisions on how citizenship is attained, entrenched provisions for the protection of the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual, provisions regarding our institutions of government,
the Parliament, the Executive, the
Judiciary and the Public Service.
It was the document which was to provide the framework for and to further define our new nation and its goals.
It marked the inception of our national identity as a sovereign nation.
30 of 105
Our Constitution therefore sits solidly front and central in our national existence.
The first Article the
Constitution provides that The
Commonwealth of The Bahamas shall be a Sovereign Democratic State.
Article 2. declares that our Constitution is the supreme law of the Commonwealth of The Bahamas and, subject to the provisions of the Constitution, if any other law is inconsistent with the Constitution, this Constitution (our Constitution) shall prevail and the other law shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be void. That is the provisions of the Constitution are the supreme law of our Commonwealth which no law can contravene. 31 of 105
Article 30, however, anticipated that there were existing laws
which would be preserved and not
found to be inconsistent with Articles 16 to 27 which embody what is known as the fundamental rights and freedoms provisions.)
The Articles we have placed before the Bahamian people for alteration with the support of both sides of this House as demonstrated in the Communications of the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition two weeks ago are the entrenched Articles which provide for the transmission of citizenship and for the elimination of discrimination based on sex.
Specifically:
32 of 105
1) The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) Bill 2014, the first Bill seeks to repeal and replace Article 8 and repeal completely article 9 of the constitution.
Article 8 of our Constitution states that 8. A person born outside The Bahamas after 9th July 1973 shall become a citizen of The Bahamas at the date of his birth if at that date his father is a citizen of The Bahamas otherwise than by virtue of this Article or Article 3(2) of this Constitution. Mr. Speaker Article 3(2) a savings provision which provides for persons born within marriage but outside of The Bahamas before 1973 .
This Bill seeks to repeal Article 9 which provides that 9. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in Article 33 of 105
8 of this Constitution, a person born legitimately outside The Bahamas after 9th July 1973 whose mother is a citizen of The Bahamas shall be entitled, upon making application on his attaining the age of eighteen years and before he attains the age of twenty-one years, in such manner as may be prescribed, to be registered as a citizen of The Bahamas: Provided that if he is a citizen of some country other than The Bahamas he shall not be entitled to be registered as a citizen of The Bahamas under this Article unless he renounces his citizenship of that other country, takes the oath of allegiance and makes and registers such declaration of his intentions concerning residence as may be prescribed.
(2) Where a person cannot renounce his citizenship of 34 of 105
some other country under the law of that country, he may instead make such declaration concerning that citizenship as may be prescribed.
(3) Any application for registration under this Article shall be subject to such exceptions or qualifications as may be prescribed in the interests of national security or public policy.
Article 8 deals with a child born outside The Bahamas to a Bahamian father of his foreign wife and Article 9 deals with a child born to a Bahamian mother and a foreign father within marriage outside the jurisdiction of The Bahamas. In the case of the Bahamian born father citizenship is automatically transmitted to the child but in the case 35 of 105
of the Bahamian born mother the child does not take his mother’s citizenship although he may apply to be registered between the ages of 18 to 21 years with the conditions I have set out including being subject to the interests of national security and public policy.
So Mr Speaker, if for example Mary Baxter nee Rolle, a Bahamian
woman
married
Bert
Baxter,
a
non
Bahamian, and gave birth to a child of that union say in Miami, Florida in the United States, that child, would not be permitted to take his mother’s nationality except as previously stated the child would be entitled to apply between the ages of 18 to 21 for registration as a Bahamian but must first renounce his citizenship. However, if your George Bain, a Bahamian man had a child in similar circumstances, i.e born outside of The 36 of 105
Bahamas to a foreign wife , that child will take automatically his father’s Bahamian citizenship. Article 8 therefore refers to a Bahamian man married to a foreign wife only and does not include a Bahamian woman married to a foreign man as she is not able to transmit citizenship to her child except under the conditions I have referred to and contained in Article 9.
In the case of a single Bahamian woman, however, who gives birth to a child out of wedlock in a foreign country or at home by virtue of Article 14, that child automatically takes its mother’s nationality but this is not so in the case as it relates to a single Bahamian father who in no circumstance is able to transmit citizenship to his child:37 of 105
The Constitution provides that a Bahamian woman who gives birth to a child out of wedlock can pass citizenship to her child but no such right exists for a Bahamian man who fathers a child out of wedlock
This is as I have said, by virtue of Article 14 which provides – . (1) Any reference in this Chapter to the father of a person shall, in relation to any person born out of wedlock other than a person legitimated before 10th July 1973, be construed as a reference to the mother of that person. A child born out of wedlock takes her mother’s citizenship. And so there are cases where Bahamian men have fathered children out of wedlock with non Bahamian 38 of 105
women: those children are not citizens of The Bahamas whether they were born in or outside The Bahamas but will take their mothers nationality whatever that will be. The provisions of both Articles 8 and 9 are addressed in The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) Bill 2014 the effect of which is removing Article 9 completely and altering Article 8 and providing that “ A person born outside The Bahamas shall become a citizen at the date of his birth if at that date his father or mother is a citizen of The Bahamas otherwise than by virtue of this Article or Article 3 (2) or Article 10 of the constitution� In other words only if the mother or father is a born Bahamian and has not acquired citizenship by
39 of 105
marriage or by being born outside the jurisdiction of The Bahamas. The EFFECT of this Bill is to allow Bahamian born men and Bahamian born women to have equal capacity to automatically transmit their citizenship to their children in circumstances where their children are born outside the Bahamas.
The second Bill to which I refer to is The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment ) (No 3) Bill 2014 which seeks to amend this very provision i.e. Article 14, which I have just alluded to by deleting paragraph 1 in full and redefining that the meaning of “father” in relation to a child born out of wedlock. The Bill states that “father” in relation to a child born out of wedlock means a person who is proved in a 40 of 105
manner recognized in law to be the father of that child; This is to allow for a Bahamian man to pass citizenship to his child in all circumstances including a child born out of wedlock or out of The Bahamas.
The Bill also provides for such a child to take his father’s citizenship if that child is born after the death of his father if his father was a Bahamian citizen at the time of his death.
Mr. Speaker, it is further proposed to properly supplement this provision that the Status of Children Act be further amended in the Status of Children (Amendment ) Bill 2014 to remove the one significant remaining distinction between children born within
41 of 105
marriage and without by deleting the exceptions of citizenship . For the practical purposes of law there will therefore be no remaining distinction between children born in wedlock and those born outside of wedlock.
There will be a further amendment to create a more stringent or higher test for proof of paternity in the matter of citizenship than is currently provided for under that Act. At this time
section 7 of the Status of Children Act
governs proof of paternity which provides (1) Unless the contrary is proven on a balance of probabilities, there is a presumption that a male person is,
42 of 105
and shall be recognised in law to be, the father of a child in any one of the following circumstances — (a) the person was married to the mother of the child at the time of its birth; (b) the person was married to the mother of the child and that marriage was terminated by death or judgment of nullity within 280 days before the birth of the child, or by divorce where the decree nisi was granted within 280 days before the birth of the child; (c) the person marries the mother of the child after the birth of the child and acknowledges that he is the natural father; (d) the person was cohabiting with the mother of the child in a relationship of some permanence at the time of the birth of the child, or the child is 43 of 105
born within 280 days after they ceased to cohabit; (e) the person has been adjudged or recognised in his lifetime by a court of competent jurisdiction to be the father of the child; (f) the person has, by affidavit sworn before a justice of the peace or a notary public or by other document duly attested and sealed, together with a declaration by the mother of the child contained in the same instrument confirming that the person is the father of the child, admitted paternity, but such affidavit or other document shall be of no effect unless it has been recorded with the Registrar General; (g) the person has acknowledged in proceedings for registration of the child, in accordance with the 44 of 105
law relating to the registration of births, that he is the father of the child; (h) the mother of the child and a person acknowledging that he is the father of the child have signed and executed a deed to this effect in the presence of a counsel and attorney, but such a deed shall be of no effect unless it is notarised and recorded with the Registrar General prior to the death of the person acknowledging himself to be the father; (i) a person who is alleged to be the father of the child has given written consent to that child adopting his name in accordance with the law relating to the change of name; or (j) a person who is alleged to be the father of the child has by his conduct implicitly and 45 of 105
consistently acknowledged that he is the father of the child. (2) Where circumstances exist that give rise to presumptions of paternity in respect of more than one father, no presumption shall be made as to paternity. Mr Speaker the amendment proposed excludes these various tests and provides for the transmission of citizenship through a proven blood or DNA connection
- see amendment
The amendments proposed therefore to Articles 8 and 14 and the repeal of Article 9 and the consequent amendment of the Status of Children Act as aforesaid will allow for both Bahamian born men and Bahamian born women to pass on citizenship to their children 46 of 105
whether in or out of marriage and whether born in or outside The Bahamas. Provisions related to the transmission of citizenship to children.
The two remaining proposed changes are contained in The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) (No 2) Bill 2014 and The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) (no 4) Bill 2014.
The first of these remaining two Bills namely The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) (No 2) Bill 2014 addresses the issue of citizenship to the foreign spouses of Bahamian citizens and seeks to repeal and replace Article 10 of the Constitution. Article 10 provides –
47 of 105
10. Any woman who, after 9th July 1973, marries a person who is or becomes a citizen of The Bahamas shall be entitled, provided she is still so married, upon making application in such manner as may be prescribed and upon taking the oath of allegiance or such declaration as may be prescribed, to be registered as a citizen of The Bahamas: Provided that the right to be registered as a citizen of The Bahamas under this Article shall be subject to such exceptions or qualifications as may be prescribed in the interests of national security or public policy.
In short the foreign wife of a Bahamian man is entitled upon application and upon taking the oath of allegiance to be registered as a citizen of The Bahamas by virtue of her marriage to a Bahamian man 48 of 105
although that right is subject to any exceptions or qualifications in the interests of national security or public policy.
The corresponding right does not exist in the case of a Bahamian woman married to a foreign man pure and simple.
It is proposed to repeal this Bill by the following :-
Article 10 (1) Any man or woman who marries a person who is or becomes a citizen of The Bahamas shall, subject to paragraph (2) and any other prescribed condition, be entitled, upon making application in such manner as may be prescribed and upon taking the oath of 49 of 105
allegiance, or such declaration as may be prescribed, to be registered as a citizen of The Bahamas.
(2) A person any be denied registration under this Article if – (a) there is satisfactory evidence that – (i) the marriage no longer subsists; (ii) the marriage was entered into for the purpose of enabling that person to acquire citizenship of The Bahamas or; (iii) the parties to the marriage have no intention of permanently co-habiting with each other as spouses, after marriage; (b) the person has been convicted in any country of an
indictable
criminal
offence
involving
moral
50 of 105
turpitude (TO BE AMENDED) and national security or public policy exceptions (3) Paragraph (2) shall not affect the right of any person who, before the date of this paragraph was entitled to apply for citizenship of The Bahamas by virtue of any provision of this Constitution in force before that date.”
The Act comes into effect on the date the result of the referendum is published in the gazette showing approval by a majority of voters and is therefore NOT RETROACTIVE
This amendment allows for the foreign spouse of any “person” (the removal of the word ‘man’ to mean any Bahamian man or Bahamian woman or any man or 51 of 105
woman who becomes a Bahamian citizen shall be entitled to be registered as a citizen of The Bahamas but subject herein to THE CONDITIONS
contained
therein. The effect is to extend to Bahamian women the same right now accorded to Bahamian men for their spouses to be registered as citizens.
In Summary and to reiterate 4 of the 5 Bills before this House
namely
The
Bahamas
Constitution
(Amendment ) Bill, 2014, The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) (N0. 2) The Bahamas Constitution (No. 3) and the amendment proposed to the Status of Children Act propose that those provisions in the Constitution should be amended to permit for the child of a Bahamian woman who is married to a foreign man born in a country other than The 52 of 105
Bahamas to be able to take his mother’s Bahamian nationality. and for the child born out of wedlock to a Bahamian father in or outside of The Bahamas to be permitted to take his father’s nationality and for the foreign spouses of both Bahamian men and women to have an entitlement to citizenship subject to their applying, taking the oath of allegiance and subject to the specific scrutiny to assure the legitimacy of the marriage and to ensure no fraud is being perpetrated to obtain citizenship. And in the interest of national security and subject to public policy. None of these provisions will operate retroactively although the Prime Minister has foreshadowed in his Communication to this House two weeks ago that the government will as a matter of administrative policy grant citizenship to children born outside of The 53 of 105
Bahamas to Bahamian born mothers married to non Bahamian father subject to the exceptions and procedures already provided for by law.
Mr. Speaker the amending provisions prohibit fraud or the purported purchase or fraudulent facilitation of this sacred status of “Bahamian� citizenship through what might be called a marriage of convenience. This will apply to spouses of both Bahamian men and women and extends the scope of the Article to include the spouses of Bahamian women but also tightens up the long-standing provision relative to Bahamian men married to foreign women putting in place provisions in each case to avoid fraud which heretofore did not exist in our constitution.
And while as the prime
54 of 105
minister noted this was already the practice, this protection will now be enshrined in the constitution..
Mr. Speaker the final amendment proposed comes by way of The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) (No. 4) Bill, 2014. This Bill seeks to amend Article 26 of the Constitution. That Article provides – 26. (1) Subject to the provisions of paragraphs (4), (5) and (9) of this Article, no law shall make any provision which is discriminatory either of itself or in its effect. (2) Subject to the provisions of paragraphs (6), (9) and (10) of this Article, no person shall be treated in a discriminatory manner by any person acting by virtue of any written law or in the performance of the functions of any public office or any public authority.
55 of 105
(3) In this Article, the expression “discriminatory” means affording persons
different treatment
attributable
wholly
or
to
mainly
different to
their
respective descriptions by race, place of origin, political opinions, colour or creed whereby persons of one such description are subjected to disabilities or restrictions to which persons of another such description are not made subject or are accorded privileges or advantages which are not accorded to persons of another such description.
Mr Speaker, you will note this does not speak to discrimination on the basis of ‘sex”. However, the Article provides exceptions to the protection from discrimination
56 of 105
(4) Paragraph (1) of this Article shall not apply to any law so far as that law makes provision —
(a) for the appropriation of revenues or other funds of The Bahamas or for the imposition of taxation (including the levying of fees for the grant of licences); or
(b) with respect to the entry into or exclusion from, or the employment, engaging in any business or profession, movement or residence within, The Bahamas of persons who are not citizens of The Bahamas; or (c) with respect to adoption, marriage, divorce, burial, devolution of property on death or other matters of personal law; or 57 of 105
(d) whereby persons of any such description as is mentioned in paragraph (3) of this Article may be subjected to any disability or restriction or may be accorded any privilege or advantage which, having regard to its nature and to special circumstances pertaining to those persons or to persons of any other such description, is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society; or
(e) for authorising the granting of licences or certificates permitting the conduct of a lottery, the keeping of a gaming house or the carrying on of gambling in any of its forms subject to conditions which impose upon persons who are citizens of The
58 of 105
Bahamas disabilities or restrictions to which other persons are not made subject.
(5) Nothing contained in any law shall be held to be inconsistent with or in contravention of paragraph (1) of this Article to the extent that it makes provision with respect to standards or qualifications (not being a standard or qualification specifically relating to race, place c) in order to be eligible for service as a public officer or as a member of a disciplined force or for the service of a local government authority or a body corporate established by law for public purposes. The protection from discrimination on the basis of race, place of origin, political opinions, colour or creed is subject to exceptions but nowhere speaks to protection from discrimination based upon sex; The 59 of 105
Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) (No. 4) Bill 2014 amendment seeks to add the word “sex� along with the other matters so as to make it unconstitutional to discriminate in The Bahamas on the basis of sex but as stated earlier subject to the existing exceptions in paragraph (4) of Article 26 generally which alludes to matters of taxation and revenue, matters related to non-citizens
relative
to
employment
(economic
policy), profession (Bar), movement or residence within The Bahamas, with respect to adoption, marriage, divorce, burial, devolution of property on death or other matters of personal law and gambling and subject to the savings provision of Article 30 that I previously referred to as laws enacted before the date of the Constitution
that will continue to have
60 of 105
effect even though inconsistent with the terms of the constitution.
Mr. Speaker, from what I am hearing, this Bill in particular
has been the subject of some debate in
some quarters. In the prime minister’s communication he specifically articulated that this Bill will not make same sex marriages lawful. for those who are concerned that this provision now opens the door for same sex marriages it is important to note that the amendment continues as is the current position to provide for the constitutionality of laws currently in force and to be enacted which discriminate on the basis of sex as it relates to
61 of 105
marriage: that so-called discrimination is provided for in the Matrimonial Causes Act –
21. (1) A marriage shall be void on any of the following grounds:
(a) that it is not a valid marriage in accordance with the provisions of the Marriage Act;
(b) that at the time of the marriage, either party was already lawfully married;
(c) that the parties are not respectively male and female;
62 of 105
Mr. Speaker, the provision which seeks to prohibit discrimination in our country on the basis of “sex� is also
in
accord
with
our
prior
commitments
internationally : we note that on 6th October 1993, The Bahamas ratified the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against women (known as the CEDAW Convention) , however, at that time we secured
reservations
indicating that The Bahamas did not consider itself bound
to
provisions
calling
for
the
end
of
discrimination against women in our Constitution nor the mandate to give to women equal rights to men with respect to nationality of their children. Speaker this was no doubt
Mr
to preserve the then
existing provisions of our Constitution which could not be altered other than by referendum of the people 63 of 105
after having obtained a 3/4ths vote in both Houses of Parliament..
Mr. Speaker the following narrative is contained in the United Nations documentation on CEDAW:
“The Convention (which) was adopted in 1979 by the UN General Assembly, is often described as an international bill of rights for women.
The Convention defines discrimination against women as "...any distinction, exclusion or restriction made on the basis of sex which has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women, irrespective of their marital
64 of 105
status, on a basis of equality of men and women, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field."
By
accepting
the
Convention,
States
commit
themselves to undertake a series of measures to end discrimination against women in all forms, including: 
to incorporate the principle of equality of men and women
in
their
legal
system,
abolish
all
discriminatory laws and adopt appropriate ones prohibiting discrimination against women;
It affirms women's rights to acquire, change or retain their nationality and the nationality of their children.
65 of 105
As noted Mr Speaker, The Bahamas reserved its position under the constitution as it related to the discrimination
against
women
as
it
related
to
citizenship: a discrimination based on sex..
Later in 2000 at the Millennium Summit, described as the largest gathering of world leaders in history which included The Bahamas, state leaders adopted the UN Millennium Declaration, which committed their nations to a series of time-bound targets, with a deadline of 2015, that have become known as the Millennium Development Goals. There were 8 goals agreed upon which included a commitment to 1 eradicate extreme poverty, 2 Achieve universal primary education, 3 Promote gender equality and empower women 66 of 105
4 Reduce child mortality Improve maternal health 6 Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases 7 Ensure environmental sustainability 8 Develop a global partnership for development
Of the 8 critical goals of global pursuit which included eradicating poverty and disease was the goal of achieving gender equality and the empowerment of women. The Bahamas committed to these principles
Mr.
Speaker,
a
nation’s
constitution
or
more
specifically our constitution is the body of collective ideals and principles which seek to shape the forward movement and advancement of our people in the promotion of harmony and love.
It provides the 67 of 105
foundation
for
the
construction
of
an
orderly,
transparent and just society.
The Preamble sets the tone for the objectives of our constitutional
provisions
stating
that
“we”
the
inheritors of and successors to this Family of Islands DO HEREBY PROCLAIM IN SOLEMN PRAISE the Establishment of a Free and Democratic Sovereign Nation founded on Spiritual Values and in which no Man, Woman or Child shall ever be Slave or Bondsman to anyone or their Labour exploited or their Lives frustrated by deprivation, AND DO HEREBY PROVIDE by these Articles for the indivisible Unity and Creation under God of the Commonwealth of The Bahamas.”
68 of 105
Our Constitution speaks of “WE” the inheritors and successors – not simply of the men in our country or the Politicians or the wealthy or the business persons or the professionals or the Priests and reverends but “we” the collective body of persons, all citizens of our beloved Bahamas, with all of our diversity and differences and individual uniqueness committing to a common and singular vision of our country. The “we” spoken of so proudly and so wrought with emotion by Arianna in her individual performance ‘We’ having equal rights and equal protections under the constitution no matter our standing or bearing in this country: the Prime Minister and the farmer are equally endowed under the constitution as it relates to the 69 of 105
provisions
and
especially as
it
relates
to
the
fundamental provisions of the constitution.
The Constitution covers and protects me and it covers and protects the people of Englerston, the people of Abaco and Long Cay, the people of Mayaguana and Grand Bahama, and Eleuthera, and Andros, and Bimini and throughout our archipelago: Our Constitution protects and accords rights to all of our citizens be they black or white, rich or poor, adult or child. Our
Constitution
is
the
Great
Equilizer
which
empowers and protects each of us, every citizen of 70 of 105
our country, every Bahamian, and governs the affairs of state for us all.
Mr. Speaker, this is what we speak of when we speak of “citizenship.”
It is that of a SHARED STATUS
granted to members of a distinct community with full rights, each member or citizen being equal in rights, privileges, responsibilities and obligations.
The underlying philosophical concept is that of equality and that distinct community that we speak of today is The Bahamas and the citizens that we speak of are Bahamian men, women and children. In this way we are all interrelated because we come from that one family of citizens called “Bahamians” and we are thereby distinguished from citizens of 71 of 105
other countries and other sovereign states. It is why, for example, the shining achievements of our Rhodes scholars or of our men’s 4x 400 metre relay team or the historic ground broke by Arianna or the sacrifice of the brave men on the RBDF HMBS Flamingo touches us so deeply, in our bellies to our souls.
Therefore, Mr Speaker, although our Constitution was founded absolutely upon the ‘we’ , on principles of freedom
and
equality
the
fact
that
there
are
provisions which in some fundamental respects do not speak in equal fashion to the women and men of our country, that do not offer the same protections and privileges, we must give pause as we do today. One-half of our citizenry is comprised of women; women who are full members of a democratic society, 72 of 105
who vote ,
who work, who
pay taxes, who
raise
children, who sit in government, who teach our children etc .
Today our national constitution, the fundamental law which governs our society and our family of citizenry, does not accord the same rights and privileges to women citizens that are accorded to men citizens as it relates to the transmission of Bahamian citizenship (i.e. membership to this family of citizens) to the children of married women, Bahamian born,
where
that child is born outside of The Bahamas and to the spouses of women citizens while these rights are accorded to Bahamian men under our constitution. Today while women are equal in obligations and responsibilities as citizens under our constitution and 73 of 105
indeed in all laws which govern our sovereign state ,we are not equal in all rights afforded under our Constitution.
Mr. Speaker there is a direct link between rights and equality. If we are not accorded equal rights under our law and no less under the Supreme Law of our country then there is no equality between men and women, between me as a woman and citizen of this country and you as a man and citizen of this country, Mr. Speaker.
In 2014 this state of affairs , that is , the unequal treatment of men and women in such a fundamental matter as the transmission of citizenship to our children and to our spouses, in the bolstering of 74 of 105
stability of family, where Bahamian men are accorded rights and privileges that are not accorded to Bahamian women and indeed any law or policy which discriminates against women for the reason only that she is a woman is today an egregious anomaly and is inconsistent with the principles of equality of rights between citizens.
The amendments proposed go even further to allow for men to pass citizenship on to their children born out of wedlock thus removing the final barrier under the law to children born out of wedlock.
But Mr. Speaker, in the course of this debate I think it very important that we put in context the provisions related to citizenship in our Constitution so that we 75 of 105
understand the underlying rationale which accounts for this difference in treatment by the framers, many of whom comprised the freedom fighters in our country and to whom we owe much as a people. I do not think it would be correct to use a broad and condemnatory brush relative to the provisions which accorded unequal treatment between men and women in our constitution in 1973 as we will see it was based upon the rationale of the long-established and almost globally accepted interpretation of the law.
Mr Speaker, in 1972, the framers of our Constitution heralded the freedom of all of our people, proclaimed that we would never again be in bondage and like many other Constitutions at the time especially throughout the world in Commonwealth countries, 76 of 105
“citizenship” was defined in consonance with the ancient and firmly established legal principle of “domicile” of origin in common law.
In the English case of Udny vs Udny in 1869 it was established in common law precedent that: “It is a settled principle that no man shall be without a domicile, and to secure this result the law attributes to every individual as soon as he is born the domicile of his father, if the child be legitimate, and the domicile of the mother if illegitimate”.
The common law further defined that the domicile of a married woman is the same and changes with every change of the domicile of the husband.
77 of 105
The wife becomes the wife of a foreign husband in the case where the husband is a foreigner in the country in which the marriage is contracted: the wife marries knowing her husband to be a foreigner domiciled and contemplating
settled
and
permanent
residence
abroad. In other words Mr. Speaker, the law imputed automatic rules of domicile For example, Mr. Speaker, the law of domicile dictated that a Bahamian woman married to a foreign man was deemed to take on the domicile of her husband as it was presumed she would follow him to his home and not vice versa whereas a foreign woman married to a Bahamian man would take the domicile of her husband as it was again presumed that she would follow him to his home but not vice versa.
78 of 105
Children born within marriage would therefore take their father’s domicile and those born outside of marriage would take their mother’s domicile.
This was the established law at that time upon which an entire body of jurisprudence existed and the precepts of citizenship were no doubt premised upon that law and these principles could be found in constitutions of new states throughout the planet. Indeed so entrenched is this law that it has transmuted from common law to conviction that this is the correct order of things. Included also in this was the concept of “illegitimacy’ or fillius nuliis – child of no man a concept only recently removed from our jurisprudence except as it relates to citizenship and domicile. Indeed Our 79 of 105
constitution today speaks to a child being born :legitimately� although the law has for all intents and purposes save for citizenship and domicile removed that terminology from the description of any child.
But Mr. Speaker, much has changed since that time: the status of women has become radically redefined even in our own social setting:
Mr. Speaker just 51 years ago women were not allowed to participate in the electoral process yet today several of us sit in this Legislature as elected Members of Parliament, or as appointed senators, some sit in the Cabinet of our Commonwealth and hold critical portfolios.
80 of 105
Indeed today a woman sits as Head of State.
Today a woman heads the Central Bank and leads the country in developing our national monetary policy; a woman heads our financial services sector the second pillar of our economy; in our legal system a woman serves as President of the Court of Appeal and so on and so on. Indeed Mr. Speaker, statistics show that more women head households in our country than men. Indeed in the last General Elections women formed a larger block of registered voters than men. What we see today has been part of the revolution that ensued in the aftermath of sovereignty and the subsequent empowerment of women in our society made sure by a new Bahamas.
81 of 105
Under the law throughout history and all over the world and over the generations being female carried a number of varied disadvantages in various areas of life including employment opportunities, property ownership, income and other disabilities .
In fact women were often grouped with others as “persons with disabilities”.
It is reputed that ancient common law endorsed the chastisement of one’s wife (now known as wife beating or domestic violence) but with the caveat that the instrument used to chastise her was no thicker than the beater’s thumb.
82 of 105
Today domestic violence is a criminal offence and the subject of specifically enacted legislation including the Domestic Violence Act.
In the words of a Bahamian jurist in her writing The Woman and the Law in The Bahamas “The law has always treated women in a manner consistent with their supposed inferiority� or perhaps put differently, the supposed superiority of the male person.
As stated earlier, Mr Speaker, the perceived roles of women have radically changed and the laws have evolved over the years eradicating many of the disabilities and inequities that previously existed. But there
still
remains
the
prohibition
discrimination in our constitution
against
not including 83 of 105
discrimination based upon ‘sex’. We understand the meaning of that when we track the journey of women throughout
even
recent
history
to
today
and
inconsistencies in the ability to transmit citizenship to our
children
generations:
and these
the
barriers
are
faced
incongruities
over
the
in
our
Constitution which hinder principles based upon the true equality between men and women.
Mr Speaker, I believe it is today universally accepted that the legal rationale in 1973 where different and inconsistent rights were accorded to men versus women in important respects and which
though at
that time was based on long and well-established legal principles is no longer, however, able to be sustained today in 2014. 84 of 105
We are not able
today to properly rationalize
inconsistency in the accord of rights to male citizens and female citizens in this shared space called “The Bahamas”.
The whole concept of shared citizenry defeats and overrides the concept of inequality. The ancient legal concept of “illegitimacy” upon which an entire body of law including laws of inheritance was based now no longer exists in our law since the recently enacted Inheritance Act and the Status of Children Act, the effect of which is that all children are now to be treated equally under the law although exceptions were made for citizenship in the entrenched provisions of the Constitution.
As 85 of 105
previously mentioned it is intended should the people vote ‘yes’ the Status of Children Act will be amended to provide for proof of paternity of children born out of wedlock to a Bahamian father and non Bahamian father. Mr Speaker, I spoke previously to the appointment of the Constitutional Commission to the process of consultation and open dialogue of and by and with the Commission and I wish now to refer to some of the recommendations and observations relevant to this debate and emanating from that process The
Report
states
that
the
Commission
is
“unequivocal in its view that there ought to be no difference in the ability of Bahamian men and women to transmit their citizenship to their children and spouses. The Report further observes that “to provide 86 of 105
for different treatment on the basis of gender is tantamount to saying that there are classes or degrees of citizenship and that the citizenship of a woman is somehow less than that of a man�.
The Commission recommended that “all of the provisions relating to the acquisition of citizenship and transmission to children and spouses be cast in gender neutral language to provide for the equal attribution of the right of citizenship and to remove any discrimination against women in this and indeed in every other regard. This is being done with the goal of putting Bahamian men and women on an equal footing
with
respect
to
the
acquisition
and
transmission of nationality.
Bahamian men and
women
ability
should
have
equal
to
transmit 87 of 105
citizenship to their foreign spouses except under the provisions laid out in the new proposed Article 10 Of this recommendation and the Bills now before the House is that the Constitution will be amended to allow for a Bahamian born Effects – Of this recommendation and the Bills now before the House is that the Constitution will be amended to allow for a child born to a Bahamian born born married woman overseas to a foreign man will have an automatic entitlement to citizenship and the foreign spouse of a Bahamian woman will have an entitlement to citizenship subject to the strict scrutiny provisions.
The
Commission
also
made
recommendations
relating to children born in The Bahamas where either 88 of 105
parent is a Bahamian; the removal of any disabilities in the ability of a single or unmarried Bahamian man or woman to transmit citizenship to their children. The concept of “filius nullius,” the child of no man which was abolished in the Status of Children Act but preserved in the Constitution as it relates to a child born to an unwed father is proposed to be removed from the Constitution to remove any difference in treatment of a child attributable to the marital status of the parent.
Further the Commission recommended the inclusion of the word “sex” as a ground of discrimination in Article 26 although making it plain that this provision would continue to preclude same sex marriages.
89 of 105
Thus Mr Speaker the Commission identified as the two matters of highest priority for constitutional reform being
1) the amendment of the citizenship provisions to achieve gender neutrality and full equality and therefore putting men and women on the same footing with respect to the acquisition or transmission of their nationality and
2) the expansion of the definition of “discrimination” in Article 26 to include “sex” as a prohibited ground. There is a concentration on a singular concept and primary principle of equality between men and women and the removal of any discrimination against a child
90 of 105
based upon the marriage or other circumstances of his parents in the provisions of the Constitution.
And while Mr Speaker should these Bills successfully pass both Houses of Parliament and a majority vote of the electorate immediately
this
will
have the effect of
removing a fundamental structural
inequity, however, this does not mean that we still do not have much work to do in our social setting to eradicate cultural bias which cannot simply be removed by a referendum process but will require changes in our attitudes towards each other which is a more difficult and complex process. But this is an important start to a more fair, more just human society.
91 of 105
We are therefore today debating those recommended amendments to our constitution which are embodied in the Bills before this House and which are based upon the principles of equality between men and women and which bestow on children the right to attain Bahamian citizenship in two instances: the first is where she is born outside of The Bahamas to her Bahamian born mother and her non Bahamian father whether in or out of marriage. The amendment will give
that
child
automatic
Bahamian
citizenship
transmitted from her Bahamian mother and in the second instance where the child is born to a Bahamian father out of wedlock whether in The Bahamas or outside of The Bahamas that child will automatically take his father’s Bahamian nationality
92 of 105
subject to the paternity of that child being legally established. And finally granting the right of citizenship to the spouses of both Bahamian men and women subject to the restrictions or scrutiny as aforesaid.
And finally the Bill prohibiting discrimination against any person based upon their sex but subject to the exceptions already set out and subject to existing laws such as the Matrimonial Causes Act which defines that marriage is between a man and a woman. Interestingly, Mr Speaker, the Commission noted that in all of its travels, interactions and discourse no person advocated for same sex marriage.
93 of 105
It is within this context that the 5 bills now before this Honourable House have been brought The change in law will not be retroactive and thus will only apply to births and marriages after the coming into force of the change. The Government has, however, publicly committed, as a matter of policy, to grant citizenship to persons in this category who were born before, subject to the usual restrictions concerning national security, as the pre-existing rights to apply for citizenship under Article 8 are saved.
1. Mr. Speaker, the late Frantz Fanon in his book “The Wretched of the Earth” observed that “Independence has brought moral compensation to colonized people and 94 of 105
established their dignity. But they have not yet had time to elaborate a society, or to build up or affirm value. “Nation-building is a steady, circumspect, considered and purposeful enterprise. Our history cannot be ignored in the middle of it. We do not lightly touch, however, our national constitution nor indeed its entrenched provisions but this is part of our elaboration of a society and the building and affirming of the human value of Bahamian men and women and children particularly in light of our painful history
As noted by Michael D. A. Freeman in his paper Legal Ideologies,
patriarchal
precedents
and
domestic
violence: “The law plays a primary and significant role in producing social order. The power of law is a symbol. This power is based in an ideology of the law 95 of 105
and an ideology of women supported by the law”. The power of the law as a symbol must promote equity, equality and farness, recognizing the wholeness of each human being.
In the words of T. Marshall “If a law is to be effective in its function and ideology, it must appear to be just” Mr. Speaker, the amendment of the Constitution is a sacrosanct act: not to be lightly or frivolously taken. Our journey here today is the culmination of a prolonged and public exercise undertaken by the Constitution Commission.
I believe it very important that having regard to the history of our electoral process that we must accord to the Bahamian electorate an undoubted level of 96 of 105
sound judgment and common sense.
This is the
premise of our Constitution which mandates the decision-making from the Parliament to the people. There have been a number of newspaper reports and editorial commentary chastising the Government for the length of time it has taken in the execution of this process:
However, as we get closer we note the call lessens as we become less verbal and more contemplative.
Mr Speaker, the Constitution of The Bahamas belongs to
the
Bahamian
people,
not
to
any political
organization who may hold the reign of power for the time being, or any Party in Opposition for the time being nor the handful of Members who sit both in this 97 of 105
House and that other place nor to any singular opinionated individual or groups of individuals. It is not a political football but a sober and considered and careful undertaking.
The Constitution is that document which enshrines our fundamental values which play out in the everyday lives of all of our people and facilitates our existence as citizens.
It in many ways shapes and forms our cultural identity: it provides for our institutional structures of government and protects the rights of the individual against all manner of things including against the arbitrary exercise of state powers : these protections
98 of 105
and rights are described as the fundamental rights and freedoms.
Our constitution is a sacred document. And it is very important that nothing is done to trivialize or ‘dumb down� its import nor the critical nature of the exercise in seeking to alter its provisions. I
have
read
individuals
in
comments our
attributed
country which
to
respected
suggest
non
participation in this fundamental exercise because of the state response to the outcome of the vote on legalizing gambling.
Mr Speaker, I wish to reiterate in the strongest way that the referendum on gambling is not in the same class of this of which we speak. 99 of 105
This process is mandated by our constitution and the outcome is a legally binding result.
It would in my humble but strongly held view be counter- productive and especially harmful if leaders in our country make any connection of this process to any other activity as it is an entirely distinct, unique process and that such comments will lead to the non participation of citizens in the shaping of their Constitution. In the muting of voices in this shared exercise.
Mr Speaker, should these bills pass in both houses of Parliament with the three quarters vote as mandated
100 of 105
by Article 54, a national referendum will be held with 4 questions placed upon the ballot namely 1)Question� Approval of alteration to Articles 8 and 9 of the Constitution
Do you approve of this Bill, The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 2014 which seeks to – (a)
Alter Article 8 of the Constitution to enable a
child born outside The Bahamas to a Bahamian mother
who
was
born
in
The
Bahamas
automatically become a citizen of The Bahamas at birth just as a child would be if born outside of The Bahamas to a Bahamian father; and (b)
Repeal Article 9 consequentially
101 of 105
2) Question Approval of alteration to Article 10 of the Constitution
Do you approve of this Bill, The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) (No 2) Bill, 2014 which seeks to alter Article 10 of the Constitution to enable the foreign husband of a Bahamian woman to have the same constitutional right to obtain citizenship as a foreign wife of a Bahamian male but subject to ensuring that the marriage in question is not a marriage of convenience or that the foreign person in question has never been convicted in any country of an indictable offence involving moral turpitude
3)Question Approval of alteration to Article 14 of the Constitution 102 of 105
Do you approve of this Bill, The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) No. 3) Bill 2014, which seeks to alter Article 14 of the Constitution to enable the Bahamian father of a child born outside of a marriage to pass his citizenship to that child just as an unmarried Bahamian woman can presently do but subject to proof of paternity
4) Question Approval of Article 26 of the Constitution Do you approve of this Bill, The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) (No. 4) Bill 2014 which seeks to alter paragraphs (3) and (5) of Article 26 of the Constitution by inserting the word “sex” in the definition of the expression
“discriminatory”
so
as
to
make
unconstitutional to discriminate on the basis of sex 103 of 105
but subject to existing exceptions mentioned in paragraph (4) of Article 26?
Mr. Speaker once these Bills have been successfully passed
by
Parliament
a
series
of
educational
meetings for a and meetings and media aides to provide information as to the meaning of these Bills will be embarked upon to ensure that Bahamians have a full and complete understanding of the meanings and implications of the proposed alterations to the Constitution
As pointed out in the PM’s Communication the Amendments help to remediate the problem of structural inequality and discrimination
104 of 105
Mr. Speaker, I move for the second reading of these Bills in this Parliament: I have sought to explain as best I can the meaning and effect . We will rely soon on the collective wisdom of our Bahamian people. It is my hope and prayer that they will accept the basic and fundamental principle of equality between Bahamian men and women and for their children. I end as I began in the laying of these Bills in reciting a poem by Marion Bethel in tribute to Dame Doris Johnson who half a century attempted to make her case at that bar in this House which then only comprised the membership of men
for the right of
women to vote *
105 of 105