Editorial | Jamaican citizenship only

While it was deeply troubling that the issue was overshadowed by race and the seeming abuse, for political gain, of citizens’ private information held by the government, Mark Golding, the opposition leader, did the right thing by deciding to renounce his British citizenship.

So, too, Mr Golding’s shadow finance minister, Julian Robinson, and the government minister, Senator Matthew Samuda.

With this declaration, The Gleaner, overturns its previous ambivalence, tending towards support, for Jamaicans of dual or multiple citizenship being allowed to sit in the island’s parliament, in keeping with the concept of a Greater Jamaica, whose borders extend beyond the insular state.

We still hold that Jamaicans in the diaspora, and important and cherished members of the national family, their contribution to the country’s economic and social well-being ought not to be underestimated, and should be recognised.

Indeed, in 2023, Jamaicans in the diaspora sent home over US$3.1 billion, valuing, according to the World Bank, nearly 19 per cent of GDP and placing the island 18th on the global league table of countries to which folks abroad remit money. Remittances ranks only after tourism as Jamaica’s earner of foreign exchange.

Beyond the sterility of such data are real people – family members and friends, whose lives and livelihoods are made better by the inflows. Which tends to make any discussion about citizenship and political representation an emotive topic.

Nonetheless, after deeper reflection, this newspaper has concluded that people who hold or aspire to national leadership, and to occupy positions of great power, including control of the coercive apparatus of the state, ought not to be inherently subjected to conflicts of interest, or the appearance or potential thereof.

SUPPORT CRC RECOMMENDATION

Put simply, The Gleaner supports the recommendation of the Constitutional Reform Committee (CRC) for the elimination of the eligibility of citizens of Commonwealth countries, who have lived in Jamaica for a year, to membership of the legislature: the House of Representatives and the Senate.

But, we go further. That right should be enjoyed exclusively by persons who are solely of Jamaican citizenship.

We also support the position of the former prime minister, P.J. Patterson, that certain sensitive positions, such as the chief of defence staff and the defence board; the commissioner of police; the chief justice; the president of the Court of Appeal; and permanent secretaries, should be held by people of exclusive Jamaican citizenship. Although Mr Patterson didn’t specifically name this category of public officials, we would add certain critical ambassadorial appointments.

We will no doubt be reminded that many countries, including the United States, allow dual citizens the right of membership of their legislature, and, in some cases, the potential to become head of government and/or head of state.

While The Gleaner acknowledges these facts, we note that this argument is, especially when considered in the context of the skewed dynamics of global power and international relations, extremely fraught.

Despite the consistent declarations about adherence to a rules-based international order, it is those with power who make the rules and, more importantly, determine their application.

As it now stands constitutionally, Jamaica citizens, and citizens of member countries of the Commonwealth, are eligible to stand for election to the House, or to be appointed to the Senate.

But there is a proviso. The Constitution, at Section 40 (2) (b), excludes any one “who is, by virtue of his own act, under any acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience or adherence to a foreign state”.

It was this provision that, in 2007, caused Abe Dabdoub to challenge Daryl Vaz’s election to Parliament as the representative for Portland Western and to have himself installed as the member of parliament (MP).

Mr Dabdoub failed to reach the House by default. But the courts ejected Mr Vaz from Parliament and caused him to face a by-election for the seat after he had renounced his US citizenship.

RENOUNCE FOREIGN CITIZENSHIP

The Vaz case led to a number of other MPs of the governing Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) having to renounce foreign citizenship and fight by-elections.

This provision doesn’t apply to Mr Golding, who gained his British citizenship by the fact that his father, Sir John Golding, who became a famous orthopaedic surgeon, emigrated to Jamaica to teach at The University of the West Indies (UWI) and stayed. Mark Golding was born in Jamaica. His parents registered him, as a child, as a British citizen.

Messrs Robinson and Samuda were born in the UK, so didn’t do anything by their “own act” to bring themselves into “acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience or adherence to a foreign state”, which, in this case, also happens to be a member of the Commonwealth.

There are probably other members of parliament who haven’t declared their status but who are citizens of Commonwealth countries. They, therefore, meet the eligibility requirement.

However, the presumptions that caused the framers of the Constitution to carve out a special place for Commonwealth citizens no longer exist, and were probably conceptually flawed from the start., They assumed, and embraced, the notion of natural political and social affinity with the former colonial power, its old dominions, and its other newly independent colonial appendages. Even if that were true then, the nature of the Commonwealth has altered fundamentally over six decades.

With respect to legislators and other people who hold sensitive posts in government, it ought to be certain, and beyond doubt, that they are under no “acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience or adherence to a foreign state”.

Indeed, dual citizenship imposes obligations of fealty to the second state, to whose laws and rules all its citizens are expected to abide, regardless of their other citizenships.

As the US Supreme Court held in the 1952 case, Kawakita v United States: “An American citizen owes allegiance to the United States wherever he may reside.”

And we might add, whatever position he holds.

It would be interesting to observe what would happen if a person with US and Jamaican citizenships were appointed to be Jamaica’s ambassador, or to some other diplomatic post in the United States, and, while in the USA, was accused of breaching US law, say espionage.

Obviously, there would be tensions between that person’s US citizenship and the Geneva Conventions that would be best not to be tested, especially given the relative power of the two states.