Sharia Law? Wrong Move

After a long silence a number of my longtime readers must be wondering whatever happened to the Jamaican Tory, to be frank my work has kept me quite busy these days so I cannot say I have much in terms in time to make regular posts like I used to, however something happened this week that has caught my attention and I am afraid I can no longer keep silent. It concerns the decision of the British Judiciary to start using Islamic Style Sharia Law in British courts for the first time ever.

            

This latest turn of events is rather unfortunate and deeply disturbing and I cannot help but wonder, what in the world could possess the Law Society in the UK to take such a  backward step?, I mean seriously what in the world were they thinking?. Whatever happened to good old Common Law?, the same Common Law that has been in use for over thousands of years since the time of the early Celts, Anglo-Saxons and Normans? This same proud legal tradition which has been bequeathed to every corner  of the Former British Empire and has stood the test of time for well over a millennium, why is it that the British judiciary now deems that the law of the land is not good enough for the Muslim migrant population in the UK that they have to resort to this retrograde step drawing on something that is totally alien and foreign to British culture.

               

The decision taken by the British judges is but an outward sign of a deeper problem taking over only Great Britain but indeed the entire Western World, this problem is the rise of Islam, for a number of years western countries particularly European ones have swarmed by a large population of Muslim migrants fleeing from one problem or another and coming to settle in new homes , the problem is that whenever they arrive, they still want to behave as though they are in their homeland and refuse to change their lifestyles to suit the culture of their adopted country, this of course begs the question why even bother to leave at all? Today many communities in the UK and indeed across Europe are so filled with them  to the point where white people are now becoming a minority in their very own homeland, something that would have unthinkable even a generation ago, none expresses this sentiment more than British Actor John Cleese who once claimed that London is really and truly no longer  an English city, of course he was criticized for being racist at the time he made the comments, to be quite frankly his concerns had much merit then as they do now, if things continue on this trajectory the United Kingdom of Great Britain will be transformed into the Islamic Republic of Great Britain (the very thought that that even being a possibility sends cold chills all over me).

This notion of Islamic migrant populations taking over Europe is nothing more than a form of self hate and reverse ethnocentrism pushed by the left, in which children are thought to see every culture as superior to their own, they are thought that being European is evil and that they must learn to hate themselves and all the cultural practices of their ancestors all the name of diversity and multiculturalism, what a load of rubbish. Whilst I will admit that Europeans did do some horrible things to other Non-Europeans in the past, that is no excuse to say that everything that comes from Europe is all bad or that their descendants should hate themselves in perpetuity over the bad things that only some of their ancestors participated in. To demand that European countries roll over and wallow in the notion of white guilt is like telling non-Europeans that they should still see themselves as inferior simply because their ancestors were slaves centuries ago, both notions are completely ridiculous and laws should not be altered to suit the needs of foreign migrants, they should either work with the law as it is or go back to where they come from.

               

Being a big fan of history, I used to like reading about the crusades when Islamic warriors clashed with European Knights over control of the Holy Land, indeed England was one of the leading Christian nations involved in the wars and there were even several Kings that fought and bled beside their men to ensure the survival of their culture and way of life, who would not let alien elements invade their country, all these  brave English Knights must be turning in their graves now to  see what is happening to the country they fought and bled for so many centuries ago.

                   

Some of you may be wondering why is it that a Jamaican is taking interest in these legal developments going on in the UK, the truth of the matter is that  over the last 350 years of Jamaica’s history English culture has left of dominant mark on our own history, sure there are a  many other elements  that influence us as well such as the Indigenous Indians, the Chinese, the Indians, the Jews etc. but for the most part Jamaica’s history and culture has been shaped mainly by British and African elements, British culture is deeply steeped into our own culture after all they too form part of our ancestry and as such it’s erosion is should be seen as deep sign that serious changes are on the horizon for western countries and sad to say this change is not for the better.

                     

This commentary was in no way meant to be Islamophobic regardless of how it may sound, the truth of the matter is that I believe Sharia Law has it’s place and that place is in the  Middle East NOT in Britain (or any other western country for that matter),  It is based on the Koran which is not seen as the rule of faith and practice by non-Muslims after all I don’t recall hearing on any Muslim country voting to adopt British Common Law so why should the UK adopt Sharia, a legal system that has a dubious reputation in many western countries and associated with human rights violations such as "honour" killings, mark my words this most backward step will have disastrous consequences. 

Thoughts on the Venezuela crisis

The Jamaican Tory can no longer keep silent on this issue that has been making headlines around the world recently, which has to do with the crisis going on in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, as we all must be aware of by now, the country has been rocked by a series of riots and clashes between the citizens and government forces, for those who may not have been following the story, the whole crisis began early last month with a nationwide student protest over a various number of issues, mainly security, the breakdown of law and order and the poor state of the economy all of which have  been blamed on Venezuela’s current President, Nicholas Maduro.

              

There are many speculations as to what the root cause of the crisis may be as well as reasons as to why it escalated so quickly, but anyone who has followed political and historical happenings in that country would know that this was bound to happen, I don’t mean to sound harsh or judgmental but the truth is that you reap what you sow and that is exactly what is happening here. Ever since the late 1990s Venezuela has been under the spell of a personality cult led by  the late El Caudillo Presidente Hugo Chavez,  a man known for  his eccentrics and twisted charisma that captured people's hearts almost in the same way that Hitler’s Nazism did to Germany in the 1930s . Under his rule he introduced what he called Bolivarian Socialism or Socialism for the 21^st century, both of which were nothing more than code words for saying that he was introducing his own special brand of Communism into the country, his schemed worked brilliantly and from that time up until early in 2013 he was basically untouchable...or so he thought, but alas not even he as mighty as he thought he was could escape from the cold hands of death.  That of course leads us to his successor, the current President Maduro, virtually known for most of his career as Chavez’s main henchman, far less creative or charismatic with hardly an original thought in him; Senor Maduro had big shoes to fill.

            

All throughout Chavez’s years, Venezuela was infested by the host of social and economic problems but Chavez being a master of propaganda gave the impression that things were fast improving for the people in his country, it seems as though however his successor was not nearly as good an expert illusionist as he was hence the reason why many social problems are now coming to the fore and the new administration (which is really a continuation of the Chavez regime) almost a year in power still has no clue as to how solve this country’s problems or at least pretend that they are doing so in a manner that will satisfy the people, hence the open revolt.

            

As I mentioned earlier, I’m not surprised that this is happening; only that it didn’t happen sooner. Socialism no matter how you try to spin it or brand it, never works and the kind of socialism attempted in Venezuela was that of the worst order, now the people of Venezuela are finally beginning to see through their government’s deception, the "Partido Socialista Unido de Venezuela" no longer looks like an invincible machine now that Chavez is no longer around to lead them, the big question is how long will this go on? It’s already seen as a major humanitarian crisis (even though now the eyes of the world are fixed on the Ukraine Crisis, which I will deal with in due course), how will the Venezuela’s neighbours in Latin America respond?, what about the Petro-Caribe deal signed between Venezuela and several Caricom states?, what implication will it have for the continuation of this arrangement? All these and more are extremely important questions to ponder in this crisis where the end is not yet in sight. 

Uganda's Dilemma

One must have been living under a rock to not hear about the latest moves made by the government of Uganda against the LGBT people living in their country. Recently the Ugandan Parliament passed a bill making homosexuality a crime punishable by life imprisonment, this bill was later signed into law by President Yoweri Museven. This new basically puts not only every Ugandan LGBT individual but also those who advocate on their behalf at risk because now the state is authorized to adopt the most draconian methods to deal with such persons. This is a rather unique situation indeed even in many countries where gay rights are not recognized this method may seem a bit over the top, in an earlier post I had once stated that due to Putin’s anti-gay  stance, Russia might one day rival Jamaica as the most homophobic country in the world that goes to shows that even the best of us must eat our words at times because clearly Uganda has surpassed Jamaica and Russia to become the new most homophobic nation on earth.

                

Ever since the passage of this bill by Uganda there have been many different views weighing on from different sides of the political spectrum, Ranging from the far right who totally support the measures of the Ugandan government, to the more moderate conservatives, who agree with the idea of a nation standing up for its traditional beliefs and not being influenced by the LGBT agenda pushed by certain liberal western countries but at the same time they also feel that the methods taken to enforce this new law are a bit extreme while at the far end of the spectrum of the leftist who of course are totally flabbergasted by what they describe as a ghastly violation of human rights.

                                  

In all fairness, I think I stand  closer to  the  moderate right on this issue. It is no secret that the Jamaican Tory has never been a fan of the so called “gay rights” movement and anything that will halt the spread of their worldwide influence will certainly have my support. But that still leaves one important question that I’m sure a lot of moderates must be asking themselves right now, “does the ends really justify the means?”, sure the President’s intentions may not be all that bad his methods  can only be described as draconian, how far will this go?, what will be the end result of this? No one knows for sure. To illustrate my meaning earlier this week it came out that a Uganda magazine printed a list of the top 200 gay persons living in the Republic, even some persons who have not previously identified themselves among that group are now on that list,  I cannot help but wonder why this was done. Almost everything else I can understand but this was just plain bizarre as now 200 people will be living with a target on their back every single day that they remain in the country, that was most certainly not a smart move on their part, as mass killings could end of being the result, and I’m not so sure that was the intention of the Ugandan government.

                      

Then of course there is the whole matter of the reaction of the international community, not surprisingly the US and several European countries as well as the liberal media houses and human rights groups that dominate them wasted no time in vilifying the Ugandan government, especially Mr. Museven, several countries have already cut or threatened to cut aid to Uganda. It is no secret that US President Obama is on a mission to spread gay rights all over the world, only a few months ago he found himself in the middle of a row with several African leaders over the very same issue while on a tour of the continent. So naturally this latest development has placed a serious dent in his plan, no wonder he is fuming.  But as I said before regarding Russia and I will repeat the same with regards to Uganda, a sovereign state has every right to enact laws that it thinks are in the best interest of its people and no foreign influence be it governmental or private lobby group has any real authority to dictate to the duly elected government of an independent country what it’s policy should or should not be, that right belongs solely to the citizens of said country.

                        

Before closing  I must say that I find President Museven to be a rather brave man, few would ever dare give assent to such a bill regardless of their personal views for the sheer fact that there are many factors at stake, Uganda is hardly one of the most advanced countries in the world and for its leaders to forego monetary aid in order to stand up for what they truly believe in takes a whole lot of guts.  In a world where it seems as though the LGBT agenda is taking over everywhere it’s refreshing to see that there are those who still refused to be bullied into acceptance but rather choose to follow its own path. For too long now when certain persons (especially celebrities) find it convenient to come out the closet, they are being hailed as being brave and having guts,  in truth however since so many of them are doing it nowadays I would hardly call it brave or unique but rather little more than a publicity stunt to gain more attention. It’s when a person (or in this case a country) chooses to stand up and defy the crowds, defy expectations and freely follow his God-given conscience regardless of the differing opinion that is what truly makes one bold and distinctive, this boldness is exactly what the Government of Uganda displayed with this latest law. 

Let Traditional Throne Speech Remain

As I sat here considering what to write about in this latest post, a friend of mine brought some rather disturbing news and I feel compelled to share. It has to do with a proposal put forward by a certain member of parliament to have the standing orders of parliament amended so instead of opening parliament with the customary  throne speech, it would be replace by his own artificial creation “people’s speech”.  The Member of Parliament in question goes by the name Raymond Pryce, who represents the constituency of North East St Elizabeth. Before I even get into the issue at hand let me first talk about the man himself. Pryce is well known for his radical views which places him squarely left of the political divide, being a first term MP he’s a newcomer to the political scene after being placed to contest what is considered to be a safe seat  for the People’s National Party less than a month before the 2011 general elections. Although he hardly did much to demonstrate why he should be elected given his short notice nomination he was elected solely on the fact he was representing the interest of the PNP, so much  for meritocracy. Since his election Pryce has been a rather controversial man, known for his repeated acts of disrespect towards God (he can’t even quote the Lord’s Prayer correctly) , the Queen, his fellow MPs and even conservative elder statesmen such as former Prime Minister Edward Seaga. He is also known for advocacy on issues of republicanism and legalization of marijuana and other pro-left wing issues, that about sums up who this man really is.

                  

As for his proposal let me categorically say from now that such a notion is unacceptable and unthinkable. It was first proposed by Pryce in 2012 who had asked for it to be done in time for the 2012 speech, fortunately then nobody else in the House took up the debate and the topic soon died, 2012 and 2013 both passed with the Governor-General delivering his traditional Throne Speech and is expected to do the same later down in the year, imagine my absolute shock and dismay to learn after all this time that the issue is still on the agenda, what could the Cabinet even be thinking that they could want to give this suggestion a second thought?, I mean seriously, one would have thought that when the Prime Minister and her colleagues meet at Jamaica House they would actually be considering issues that of most pressing concern to the nation and not that trivial nonsense, which is the only thing a intellectually deprived socialist like Pryce could actually consider as his main contribution to parliament instead of doing what he’s being paid to do by representing the interest of his constituents, the people of North East St Elizabeth deserve better than the likes of him for a MP anyway , and the people of Jamaica certainly don’t waste their time thinking about whether the parliament should be opened with a Throne Speech or a People’s Speech so why the fuss all of a sudden?.

                 

Anti-Monarchism is a key element of leftism in this country and this is just another way for them  to continue their republicanism by stealth  as part of an overall agenda to subvert the constitution of this land and indoctrinate us into believing their propaganda. Pryce claims that the speech should be renamed people’s speech because it shows the primacy of the Jamaican people, however the very fact that Pryce actually proposes the change is enough reason why it should not be done, here's why. If Pryce really did have the interest of the people at heart then he wouldn't be wasting his time making petty propositions but rather he would making proposals that would be of some actual use to the people of Jamaica or at the very least to the people of his constituency, this proposal however is nothing more than an ego booster for him, that’s why most of the other MPs didn’t even bother to debate the issue in Parliament

                     

The Throne speech is so named because it comes from the Throne, it was written by the minsters of Her Majesty’s Government and is read by Her Majesty’s Representative the Governor-General, I don’t see what is so hard about that to comprehend, and while some may be tempted agree with Pryce I will not be so quick to jump on the bandwagon, some people are often fooled by politicians claiming to be on the “side of the people’  nothing demonstrates this more than the last general elections when the PNP used the slogan of "people power" to trick many persons into buying into their publicity stunt, however  former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher warned that when   “Socialists cry "Power to the people", and raise the clenched fist as they say it.  We all know what they really mean - power over people, power to the state." , she was right on the money and  that certainly seems to be the same trend here.

                           

Pryce can argue about symbolism all he wants but the truth of the matter is Jamaica’s constitution makes it plain that we are a constitutional monarchy and as such our ceremonies and symbols should reflect this, the Queen  is the very  personification of the state itself because the Crown is sovereign and as such the use of the term  "people's speech" to open parliament  would be highly unconstitutional  and as  minsters of the Crown sworn to uphold and defend the constitution the Cabinet should not even be considering this treasonous proposal  , instead they should leave well enough alone as this country have far more urgent issues to deal with instead to trying to distract public attention with this ludicrous neo-Marxist  pro-republican rhetoric. 

Compulsory Voting?? Bad Idea

It’s been a while since I last made a post and maybe some of my readers are wondering why is it that the Jamaican Tory seems to have fallen off the grid, well the fact is that I’m back now and ready to issue the first post of 2013, which also happens to be the 50^th post in this Jamaican Tory series . So many things have taken place in my absence, so many incidents I can write on but for now I’ll choose something very close to home.

It concerns some rather controversial comments made by a prominent member of parliament Everald Warmington from South West St Catherine, a rather eccentric character known for his wit and flamboyant style but is who also a true conservative and one of the few members of the present parliament who has spoken up in support of the monarchy and it’s place in our constitution, coming in confrontation with certain members of the political left in order to get his point across. A man some (particularly the left) would consider to be highhanded, obnoxious and even downright rude but whom I  have come to have respect for due to his conservative views and uncompromising stance even if his style of doing so is a bit unorthodox, he seems to have his head on straight, which is why it gives me no great pleasure to have to criticize him now.

                                

In a speech made to a group of party supporters, he was reported to have said that "If you don't vote, you don't count," basically telling his constituents that those who refuse to exercise their constitutional right to vote, should not expect to receive any forms of aid from his constituency office. Naturally these comments sent shock waves across the island, although it is common knowledge that politicians are hardly the most respected people in Jamaica, few would dream that an MP would be brazen enough to make such a statement on national television (in truth a number of politicians have already adopting this practice of having little dealings or contacts with those who are no aligned to them or their party, even though they publicly deny it). Everyone from the media to various civil society groups wasted no time in villanising Warmington for his comments and to be frank I can’t say I’m shocked and I doubt he is either, it’s not the first time he’s been on the receiving end of such angry public backlash for what is considered to be extremely offensive language which some even goes as far as to say displays his contempt for the people that he is sworn to serve as member of parliament.

However when the dust settles and all the trash talk is over, Warmington’s comments does leave room for the nation to debate a very important issue, should compulsory voting be imposed in Jamaica or not?, some countries already have this e.g. Australia, Argentina, Singapore, Peru and a few others, it’s not a whole lot but still there is precedent for it.

                                                    

                                     

This year 2014, will mark the 70^th anniversary that universal adult suffrage was granted in this country and anyone aware of our history will know perfectly well the hard struggles that our ancestors had to go through in order to obtain the right to elect their representatives in free and fair elections, a right which they finally won on October 27, 1944 when His Majesty King George VI gave his royal assent to the new constitution. This Order in Council saw  the hosting of the first democratic elections in on December 12 of that same year where every adult subject of the Crown in Jamaica was entitled to a vote. In his tirade Warmington charged that those who refuse to vote are in fact refusing to take any interest in the affairs of the nation and as such should not be entitled to any form of benefits for their lack of participation, he also called their actions as being disrespectful to those who gave their blood, sweat and tears to earn a right that many people now take for granted .

                                            

While I do sympathize with Warmington’s point of view, I can hardly say that I agree,  the truth  is that, while his comments may have triggered the calls for a discussion on compulsory voting, I seriously doubt it will go past the discussion change. If the history of Jamaica is anything to go by then it’s safe to say, the people will never accept such an imposition from the government but at the same time nor will they stand for any government that seeks to deny them the right of this franchise, Jamaicans love their freedom of choice it's just who we are as a people, in fact the latest Freedom in the world index ranks Jamaica and its Caribbean Commonwealth partners rather highly on the freedom index, far above any other group of nations in the developing world and that’s saying something.  People nowadays are getting rather disillusioned with the whole political process and comments like those uttered by Mr. Warmington only serves to heighten the cynicism among an already disgruntled population, a call for compulsory voting at this time is most certainly not a good idea, The Jamaican People simple will not stand for it. 

Contraversial, Hypocritical Speech

In this post the Jamaican Tory feels the need to comment on rather controversial comments made by the Governor-General, the person of whom I speak is not our own Sir Patrick Allen but rather his Australian counterpart, Quentin Bryce, who made a shocking speech last week coming out in support of both gay "marriage" and an Australian Republic. Since she made the speech it has been one of the hottest topics of discussion both in social media and the press. As with everything else there are always differing views on the matter, some applaud her comments as being long forthcoming, others are outraged that she would dare use her office and her position in such a manner, while others are rather indifferent saying that they expected no better from the likes of hers and it was only a matter of time before she showed her truly colours.

               

First of all, let me categorically state that the Jamaican Tory stands by his fellow monarchist (particularly Australian Monarchist) in strongly rebuking Madam Bryce for her ill-advised comments concerning the monarchy,  it makes her look like a gross hypocrite, after all she has served as Governor-General of Australia for five years and prior to that she was State Governor of Queensland for a similar number of years,  that makes ten years in total as representative of the Crown and now all of a sudden she’s  implicitly renouncing the very monarchy she has sworn to serve. There are some who have said that she was always a republican even before she took the job,  that then begs the Question  why did she even take two vice regal posts if she didn't even believe in the very office in which she served?. It is already bad enough when politicians like former Prime Minister Julia Gillard go about spewing their republican views all over the place but at least they are elected politicians, but when the Queen’s direct representative go about saying stuff like that in public, it is a grave insult to see that the very person who is appointed to represent the monarchy is now turning her back on it, it’s almost as if she had slapped the Queen in her face. I’m sure the Australian republicans must be in a frenzy right now saying that she did the right thing and her remarks were long overdue, they couldn't be more wrong as her remarks were far from appropriate give her position. Some say she was only expressing her heartfelt views on the subject, be that as it may, the Governor-General of Australia, like Governors-General from every other commonwealth realm has one main job only and that is to represent the sovereign, all other roles of the Office of the Governor-General be they constitutional, ceremonial, community or otherwise are all symbolic roles to denote the presence of the monarch via her direct viceroy,  and to that fact Bryce has certainly put herself in a precarious position.

              

Then of course there is the whole matter of gay "marriage", while many others focused only on the GG’s treasonous comments, being a traditionalist the Jamaican Tory finds her view on Gay "marriage" just as alarming as he found her views on republicanism.  Regular readers of the Jamaican Tory will know by now that the so called phenomon of “marriage equality”  is something that I have always been fiercly opposed to from day one and that will not change now.   One thing that  was found to be quite interesting though is that she mentioned support both a republic and  gay "marriage" in the same speech, causing  her to gain massive  popularity among both LGBT people and republicans, while raising the fury of both devout monarchist and anti-LGBT persons, am I the only one seeing the connection here? . It's not the first time that LGBT advocacy and anti-monarchism have been seen to go hand in hand as part of an ultra-liberalism agenda, take for instance our own Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller, is it not ironic that she the first Jamaican PM to support LGBT rights also wants to see the Queen gone?, what about the leftist human rights groups in Jamaica and other parts of the Caribbean? The same thing can also be said of their kind. Many of those who support both LGBT "marriage" and republicanism claim that their advocacy is one of equality. equality of marriage and equality of opportunity what rubbish, funny thing is about that is it looks all rather Marxist to me, let’s face the facts, Karl Marx in his writings had several  goals, two of those goals was the destruction of the family structure and also the destruction of traditional authority,  no wonder most LGBT advocates are also monarchy haters, they have a great deal in common and both are nothing more that two sides of the multifaceted yet diabolical philosophy known as cultural Marxism. 

              

To further demonstrate my point take a look at the flipside of the coin, where many of those who oppose a republic also oppose gay rights (that’s not to say that all republicans are LGBT loving or all royalist are anti-LGBT), a prime example would be Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbot, a man who is well known for his forthright views, a true loyalist and an honourable man, the kind of leader many other countries would benefit from. It is a well known fact that the Prime Minister is a supporter of the monarchy and an opponent of marriage equality, this knowledge which I’m sure the Governor-General has only goes to further underscore the seriousness of her transgressions, what could she as the Queen’s representative hope to gain by openly standing in direct opposition to her own prime minister? One cannot help but wonder if this was a political ploy on her part and if so, then why? .  Walter Bagehot in his book the English Constitution states that a constitutional monarch has three functions, The right to be consulted; The right to encourage; and The right to warn, hence the reason why a monarch can remain above the whole political fray and serve as a symbol of unity for the entire nation. The Governor-General is expected to do the same and therefore must at no time must ever be seen to be publicly in favour of one political position or political party, at least not in public anyway. This is why Bryce’s offence is so grave and why the Jamaican Tory unequivocally supports the call for her immediate resignation, clearly be her own actions she has proven that she is representing her own interest rather than the interest of the Crown. Hopefully her successor whoever he may be will be a true monarchist, since it has been supposed by many republicans that appointing a republican to the nation’s highest office will make the transition to a presidency even smoother.

                     

The Republican Movement in Australia really don’t know when to give up even after knowing they have fought and lost time and time again, now unfortunately they along with the LGBT rights groups have been given significantly fresh ammunition with which to fight against the conservative Tony Abbot Government and they have been given such means from no lesser person than the GG herself, one can only hope the conservative movement will be able to find the means to force a resignation or dismissal sooner than later and to Her Excellency, I will repeat the words of former Prime Minister Gought Whitlam, “Well may we say, God Save the Queen, because NOTHING will save the Governor-General” .

Aftermath of Conference

The annual conference of the Jamaica Labour Party has come and gone and I’m sure many of my regular readers must be wondering what happened to the review they have been promised by yours truly. Well here’s the final piece in this entire JLP vs JLP saga, for those of you do not know, the leadership race has come and gone and incumbent party leader Andrew Holness has managed to successfully defend his position against challenger Audley “Man-a-Yard” Shaw, with delegates choosing to give Holness  2,704 votes while another 2,012 voted in favour of Shaw, without a doubt it was clear who won the day and yours truly was one of those was fortunate to be on site at the National Arena in this historic day in the life of the party, a day which also has great significant for the continuance of the political right winged movement in Jamaica.

                         

So now that the elections are over one would have thought that the JLP would now get its act together, and prepare to take on the left winged People’s National Party in order to drive them out of Jamaica House come next general election, but unfortunately the fued continues as was demonstrated by actions taken by both sides this week. Upon being reelected as leader of the party, one of Holness’ first act was to reshuffle his shadow cabinet effectively placing Audley Shaw and all his supporters on the back benches of Gordon House and if that were not enough it emerged that Holness controversially sent pre-written and undated resignation letters of certain Senators to the Governor-General for his approval. According to sources, Holness had asked all opposition Senators to write undated resignation letters and submit them to him for safekeeping which he would in turn submit to Sir Patrick Allen (the Governor-General) at a time he sees fit.

                    

How does something like that work?, let me explain, the Constitution of Jamaica stipulates that the Upper House should consist of 21 senators, 13 from the government and 8 from the opposition, all of which are appointed by the Crown on the advice of the Prime Minister and Opposition Leader. The controversy in this case comes from the fact that Holness upon winning the leadership challenge had asked certain persons to politely step aside and give him a free hand to assemble his team, they refused so he took more drastic measures. Since this incident occurred there is a raging debate going on as to whether or not the leader did the correct thing, on one hand some accused Holness of being dictatorial and vindictive by seeking to ruin all those who had opposed him, such persons accuse him of violating the constitution and also brings the independence and integrity  of the senate  as an institution into  disrepute. On the other hand there are those who says that the leader is better off starting afresh with new faces, it’s only appropriate seeing as his recent  win has given him a new mandate and it would be a backward step for him to continue with the same old faces especially since some of those former senators were the very ones who had opposed Holness and supported what they saw as Shaw’s attempted coup d’état, they had gambled everything and lost, the only decent thing for them to do was to graciously step aside.

               

While I may not totally agree with the removal of Shaw and his supporters from both the shadow cabinet and the senate, I see the point Holness’ supporters are trying to make here, it kinds of reminds me of the famous line from the HBO Television series  “Game of Thrones” where a character uttered the now famous quotation “Whenever you play the Game of Thrones, you either win or die, there is no middle ground”, it seems to me like  Shaw and his crew though they’ve already lost in this game , they’re not ready to die just yet, this was exemplified in a letter sent by Shaw to Holness the day of his election loss outlining a set of demands that must be met before he will ever accept any post in a shadow cabinet led by Holness. I’m not entirely sure what his motivation was for doing so but it certainly does not seem like Shaw is ready to gracefully accept his loss and move one, in one of his campaign speeches Shaw had promised to be the worst nightmare for Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller if elected, one can only hope that now he has been rejected, he would not turn into Andrew Holness’ worst nightmare instead.

              

Then there is the whole matter of whether or not Holness’ actions in sending the undated letters to Kings House was even legal. From all accounts regardless of all the sentiments about independence of the senate, legislative review,  separation of powers and whatever other argument some persons are coming up with, in truth there is no legal basis to claim that Holness’ actions were illegal, uncalled for maybe but certainly not unconstitutional, in any organization public or private, it is understood that the person who hires you (or someone else in a similar position later on) also has the power to fire you, hence the reason why he could ask senators to step aside but not members of Parliament who are directly elected by their constituents. The 8 opposition senators were appointed on Holness’ advice and so why can’t have them removed just as easily? And as for the senate as an independent body, Where did they get that from?, the Governor-General cannot appoint a Senator on his own, he must wait to  be advised by either the Prime Minister or Opposition Leader as to who to appoint, some Caribbean countries like Trinidad and Barbados have independent senators which are nonaligned to a political party, Jamaica does not, so tell me again what kind of independent senate are they talking about.

There is an old saying that you can’t eat your cake and have it yet it seems that’s exactly what Shaw and his supporters are intent on doing, while there are some who accuse Holness and his supporters of promoting disunity in the JLP even after the race is over, that’s an unfair observation considering that the same thing can be said of the Shaw Team, quite frankly in this saga, I think there is more than enough blame to go around on all sides.