As always sources are at the bottom of the post. This blog will be looking into the effects of direct rule on the Turks and Caicos Islands and gives us a kind of template of what may happen with the British Virgin Islands, so read on to find that or scroll down to the section which is titled “Direct Rule in the Turks and Caicos Islands”.
Well. The end to this enquiry could not have come at a more interesting moment in the antics of the islands’ flawed governance, with the overseas territory’s Premier himself, Andrew Fahie, having been arrested by US authorities (alongside the head of the islands ports Oleanvine Maynard) after allegedly trying to negotiate a drug trafficking deal which would use the islands ports with what he thought was the Mexican Sinaloa cartel… but were actually undercover feds, according to US authorities.
You could not make this up, or well you could but it would just be that, some low budget movie on Netflix… but this has apparently actually happened. It has been known for a while that the governance of the British Virgin Islands has been largely flawed and ineffective due to rampant corruption, but this is corruption beyond all if proven.
It is little wonder why the inquiry within the British Virgin Islands has concluded with asking for direct rule from Britain as the islands seem unable to effectively and lawfully govern themselves. Nonetheless the now acting leader of the British Virgin Islands opposes direct rule from Britain.
I think it is clear that if the current acting leader does not wish direct rule to be a thing, they then need to prove that they can govern without rampant corruption and attempted back room deals with drug cartels in a bid to use the islands for drug trafficking and money laundering. Once again, the people of the islands suffer under the selfish behaviour of individuals.
I have done some posts previously that talk of the enquiry beginning and a later post that looked into the structure and progress of the enquiry, although since then I have left it alone. But this hasty and explosive conclusion now requires covering. The British Government have sent a Minister over to the British Virgin Islands.
If you are wondering how the British Virgin Islands are usually governed, it is governed as a parliamentary democracy with the Premier as head of Government (basically Prime Minister). The Premier is appointed based on the largest party/grouping after parliamentary elections. The Governor-General, representing the British monarch, appoints the Premier. The Governor-General is appointed by the Queen on advice of the British Government.
The UK Government handles the defense and foreign relations of the islands. But it also has powers that technically allow Westminster to legislate for the islands. But under current principles in place the UK allows its overseas territories to self-govern. But under extreme circumstances such as we are seeing with the British Virgin Islands, the UK will step in.
The minister being sent over is Amanda Milling who is the minister for overseas territories. She will talk with the islands Governor-General John Rankin and other senior officials. The UK Government is going to outline the next steps on how the islands will be governed. There is recommendation that the Governor-General John Rankin himself should take over governance of the islands on direction of the UK Government.
But any form of direct rule from the UK Government has been opposed by the current Acting Leader (following the Premier’s arrest) Natalio Wheatley, who says the territory itself opposes direct rule. Wheatley’s concerns are that direct rule would mean all power is vested in one man, with no more elected representatives who represent and make laws for the people and territory, and also no Government ministers to advance the public priorities, and no Cabinet to approve policy.
Now, this can be a little rich when talking about public interest and priority in the face of rampant systemic corruption of the islands over the years as well as the recent clownery from the now disgraced Premier… but at the same time he does have a point.
The importance of representing the people of the islands in a democratic fashion should remain paramount, as well as maintaining a system of checks and balances for legislation and policy. Hopefully the UK Government will take this into account when deciding on how direct rule will work, and also make sure to clearly outline how long it will last and what its ultimate goal will be.
And perhaps the UK should not consider direct rule so soon, maybe there is another way to go about this without needing to suspend the islands constitution. Either way it will likely be a long and hard road to put an end to such deep-rooted corruption in the British Virgin Islands.
The report from the enquiry itself, led by British judge Sir Gary Hickinbottom, has described the state of the governance of the islands as ‘appallingly bad’, but that this is not directly connected to the Premier’s arrest.
The report recommends that the UK Government suspends the constitution and implement direct rule for at least 2-years, effectively returning the islands to direct rule from London.
I think if it was simply just the report then perhaps the UK Government could have had a bit more room for negotiation and not have to immediately refer to direct rule, but with the arrest of the Premier of the islands on drug trafficking and money laundering charges, the UK Government will likely feel backed into a corner with the need for direct immediate action.
It is likely the majority of the people of the islands will not be the biggest fans of direct rule from London, and that’s not much of a surprise. The people strive for democracy and self-determination, but they are also painfully aware of the rampant systemic corruption. But, many of the islands’ inhabitants do not see direct rule as a good solution to the vast issues they are facing.
Direct Rule in the Turks and Caicos Islands
This is also not the first time that the UK has imposed direct rule on an overseas territory, the last time it happened was on the British Overseas Territory of the Turks and Caicos Islands in 2009 after an enquiry there found evidence of corruption and incompetence in its self-governance. More specifically the enquiry found ‘information in abundance pointing to high probability of systematic corruption or serious dishonesty, and concluded there were ‘clear signs of political amorality, immaturity and general administrative incompetence.
One of the specific accusations was that politicians had been selling crown land for personal gain. Galmo Williams, a former Premier of the islands before direct rule was imposed, said that he believed that he could have worked with the UK Government to solve the problems. He also said that “We will never be able as a nation to move forward if every time we reach a crossroads our rights get taken away”.
The former Premier before Williams, Michael Misick, was accused of having built up a multi-million-dollar fortune ever since he came to power in 2003. The Premier had resigned in March, but also denied accusations and defended himself by saying he had attracted valuable investment to the islands. Misick also launched a legal challenge against direct rule, which delayed its imposition but ultimately failed to outright stop it.
In this direct rule was imposed for 2-years and power was transferred to the Governor, similar to what will likely happen on the British Virgin Islands. The Turks and Caicos Islands constitution was partially suspended during this, with it most notably keeping the chapter on fundamental rights in affect.
The Foreign Office Minister at the time, Chris Bryant, said the decision was not taken lightly, but that it was an essential measure to restore good governance and sound financial management. He also claimed that many people on the islands would accept the home rule – something that is strongly disputed by many.
Galmo Williams on the other hand viewed imposition of direct rule as a coup as it had been done without the will of the people. He also said the will of the people had been ignored due to the imposition of direct rule.
There is an interesting email sent by Lanze Gardiner a citizen and Belonger of the Turks and Caicos Islands in 2010 sent to the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee.
Note: for those who do not know a Belonger is citizen of a British Overseas Territory who has close ties to the territory in question due to things like ancestry and are typically granted certain rights due to this. A newer term for Belonger is Turks and Caicos Islander that has been encouraged in changes introduced during direct rule.
The email in question had concerns over Turks and Caicos democracy during home rule. The person wanted the UK Government to address the grave injustices that were apparently taking place in the islands. The email notes that only four of the 21 members of the islands House of Assembly faced corruption allegations, which is what led to direct rule.
The email disputes the UK Government’s claim of support given by people of the islands to direct rule, and said that 7 months in, it was clear in their mind that the islanders were being marginalized. One of the things noted that not a single member of the Constitutional Review group was a Belonger themselves, despite them being constituted to write a new Constitution, revise electoral laws, and determine criteria for obtaining Belonger status.
The person also said that although there will be a consultation following proposals from the group that will include Belonger stakeholders, they also noted that the Governor said it would not be a negotiation. The person then voiced their concerns on what the UK Government would do to protect the rights of indigenous peoples of the islands, and how it would be included in the constitutional modernisation process.
The person also made note of a protest on 8th March 2010 where thousands of people marched for a return to self-rule and that it was led by the islands two main political parties who effectively represented all of the islands inhabitants, but that the protests were ignored by the Governor. The person asked of the UK Government’s response questioning its claim of support from the islands people.
Finally, they also highlighted the concerns of secrecy around the interim governance (led by the Governor and in place during direct rule), of which the islands local media had been highly critical of. They also highlighted that during a recent round of town hall meetings, the press was not allowed to film or take verbatim record of proceedings.
They even claimed a member of the press were assaulted by the Royal TCI Police when caught filming. The person then demands an explanation from the UK Government and raises concerns over being given access to information on how the government of the TCI is being run.
Sadly, I cannot find a parliamentary or government response to the email in question apart from the fact that it is simply displayed on the parliament’s publications subdomain, so they clearly received it. It is also not possible to substantiate each and every claim of the email, but at the same time it does deserve looking in to, and that such investigation or responses from either parliament or government should have been made clear.
This is just one example of why direct rule is a touchy subject for many, especially those who are Belongers. And can we blame them? We certainly would not want to be directly ruled by some island or country miles and miles away from us that are so detached basically that it all seems foreign… plus imperialism itself is a how other dark subject of many wrongs in past history.
For example, the British Virgin Islands themselves were conquered by Great Britain in the 1600s and for centuries they were used for sugar plantations worked by slaves forcibly brought from Africa. Therefore, you can understand why the many descendants of these heinous crimes do not wish to be directly ruled by Great Britain.
The ultimate outcome of direct rule for the Turks and Caicos Islands led to the adoption of a new constitution and fresh elections, with Governor-General Ric Todd saying that the islands were now more transparent, accountable and financially better run than in the past.
He described it as a modern constitution which was the result of wide consultation which included a Turks and Caicos delegation who visited London in 2011 with the aim to ensure the new constitution reflects wishes of the islands citizens and UK Government ministers.
As direct rule of the Turks and Caicos was ongoing a report for Parliament came out looking into developments. The report notes that significant sections of the population of the Turks and Caicos Islands did resent direct rule.
The Order in Council for direct rule is that Cabinet Government and the House of Assembly would be suspended and replaced by Governor rule, an interim Government would be established and led by the Governor, and would be supported by an Advisory Council and Consultative Forum.
There was a follow-up brief
to direct rule of the islands on 31st March 2010 (including subsequent updates) published by the Foreign Affairs Select Committee which expressed concerns that the previous UK Government administration failed to establish adequate funding for the Special Investigation and Prosecution Team which had been set up to investigate specific corruption allegations on the islands.
The report said the lack of funding had caused significant delays to the body’s work, concluding it could undermine the effectiveness of investigations and damage public confidence. The report was also against the previous UK Government’s view that the British taxpayer should not have to fund the Special Investigation and Prosecution Team and that the Islands Government should find the means to do so itself, with the report saying it was the UK Government’s own responsibility to fund it.
The report also highlighted a letter of complaint sent by Sir Robin Auld (who had led the enquiry that recommended direct rule) to the then Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, on 23rd March 2010, which criticized the previous UK Government’s failure to provide resources needed for the implementation of recommendations of the enquiry.
Concerns were also raised on elections planned for July 2011 set by the previous UK Government on the Islands, and that due to the slow pace of reform they were not realistic. The report called for these elections to be delayed until reforms were fully embedded. Elections were subsequently delayed.
The report highlighted a debate in the House of Lords on 10th March 2011. The debate was on overseas territories and naturally the Turks and Caicos Islands was one of its biggest issues discussed. A Lord Jones of Cheltenham raised concerns from one senior lawyer on the Islands who had written to him and likened the current situation to a dictatorship.
The 8th March protests on the Islands were also highlighted that had called for a date to be set for elections. There were also allegations from critics that the true motivation of successive British Governments was to frustrate moves towards independence for the Islands. There were also claims of a racial element that underpinned official actions, targeting predominantly black ministers in the former Misick Government for prosecution on spurious financial grounds. These claims have been dismissed by British Governments.
The Government responded to this, saying elections were still aimed for 2012 (after having been delayed from July 2011) and that the Governor would remain open to dialogue with responsible community representatives to discuss concerns.
The then Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Henry Bellingham, highlighting what was called “an unacceptable collapse in the fiscal governance of the territory” and would state that the Department was reaching the final stages to put in place a medium-term financial package for the Islands. Much financial support was highlighted throughout the report in question.
Eight specific milestones were also set out for good government and sound financial management. These milestones would need to be met before elections could be held on the Islands. These milestones were…
- Implementation of a new Constitution for the Islands that supported the recommendations of the enquiry, and that underpinned good governance and sound public financial management.
- Introduction of new ordinances, specifically the electoral process and regulation of political parties; integrity and accountability in public life; and public financial management.
- Establish robust and transparent public financial management processes providing for a stable economic environment and that strengthens the Islands Government’s capacity to manage their public finances.
- Implement a budget of measures that will put the Islands Government on track to achieve a fiscal surplus in the financial year ending March 2013.
- Implement a transparent and fair process for acquisition of Turks and Caicos Islander status (Belonger/Turks and Caicos Islander).
- Make significant progress with the civil and criminal processes recommended by the enquiry, and implementation of measures to enable these to continue unimpeded.
- Implement a new Crown land policy.
- Make substantial progress in the reform of the public service.
The corruption investigations meanwhile led by Helen Garlick were praised for making good progress and that Garlick was hopeful in bringing forth prosecutions by early next year. The report does note though that the cost of the investigations and allegations of a lack of transparency had been criticized by some residents of the Islands.
After a 15-month period of consultation, a new Constitution Order for the Islands passed the Privy Council on 13th July 2011 and was laid before Parliament on the 20th July. The Order would eventually go into force once the other milestones laid out had been sufficiently met, as once the new Constitution went into effect elections would need to be held within 30-days.
Henry Bellingham noted that there was not consensus on all provisions and that he had to make some difficult decisions on some sensitive and important issues. But he was convinced they had got a good result for the people of the Islands. He said the new Constitution was fit for purpose.
The Order also required the new Ordinances previously mentioned to come into place, and it also provided for the phasing out of the term Belonger to be replaced with Turks and Caicos Islander.
It had also previously been announced on 12th June that enough progress on the milestones had been made to hold elections in November 2012, and as such the Constitution Order was put into place in October 2012. The elections successfully took place and elected a new Government. Elections were given a broadly positive endorsement by observers.
With the milestones having largely been met and the elections successfully held you can by and large say that direct rule overall had an eventual positive outcome. Naturally discontent did remain from people on the Islands though, with a petition launched that wished for the Governor to be recalled to London. The newly elected Premier, Dr Ewing, also affirmed support for the eventual independence of the islands from the UK.
So, as can be seen, direct rule is not something so easily done. It can take some time and there are a lot of bumps in the road. And it is likely to breed discontent towards the UK and a likely stronger strive for eventual independence.
I have gone over the Turks and Caicos Islands as an example of things and processes we could possibly see take place in the British Virgin Islands as direct rule is imposed. And I have made sure to highlight the kind of discontent we are likely to see in response. There have actually already been protests in the British Virgin Islands against direct rule.
I shall be keeping my eyes open for any further interesting developments.
Sources
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
Thank you for reading this post, if you have any queries please Email me, you can find my Email in the Contacts & Community section. Please also follow The Weekly Rambler on Twitter, Reddit, Pinterest and Facebook which you can access through the buttons at the bottom of this website. You can also use the social media buttons under each blogpost to share with your family, friends and associates.
You can also subscribe to Email notifications at the right-side of this website to know whenever a new post goes up (you can easily unsubscribe from this at any time through a button in each Email notification), or alternatively you can use an RSS Feed Reader.