On the verge of Grenada’s Golden Jubilee, Dr Francis Alexis proclaims Constitution Reform For Grenada At Fifty, imploring for the Parliament to cause the cessation of swearing allegiance to Her/His Majesty as customary since the nation obtains Political Independence in 1974.
This was conveyed in a 22 January 2024 Public Statement which aspires: “How momentous would it be that our leaders (‘primarily the Governor-General and Members of Parliament’), on 7 Feb 2024, swear allegiance to ‘Grenada’. On this reform we (‘the Grenadian-people’) can more lustily sing with rousing patriotism: “Hail Grenada at Fifty”.
The Government of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) led by Dickon Mitchell did not immediately and clearly concede to Alexis’ timing, but the process for the Oath Change was set in train with various maneuverings.
First is the Motion for the 50th Anniversary of the Independence of Grenada by the Prime Minister at the Special Joint Sitting of Parliament on 06 February 2024, seeking ‘further endorsement’ to Grenada Termination of Association Order 1973 which took effect on 07 February 1974; but sadly, without Dickon giving any hope for patriating the Independence Constitution or for producing a ‘new and indigenous’ Constitution.
Also, Alexis convenes in May 2024 the Citizens for Constitution Reform (CCR) and so boosts the drive for the Change from swearing to the King of England to the State of Grenada. Relatedly followed in July 2025 is the Bank Holidays (Amendment) Act which establishes the observance of Emancipation Day on the first day of August, rather than on the first Monday in August.
The juncture of the first-time celebrating of 01 August 2025 as Emancipation Day was seen also as ‘entirely appropriate to change the Oath of Allegiance as it is set out in the 07 February 1974 Constitution, for rendering allegiance to “Grenada” as One People, One Journey, One Future’.
To achieve this, the Constitution (Oath of Allegiance) (Amendment) (No. 1) Act, 2025 and Constitution (Oath of Allegiance) (Amendment) (No. 2) Act, 2025 were rushed to take effect on 01 August 2025, amidst ‘advices, reservations and criticisms’.
Despite the promotion of excitement in the nation by Alexis and others to have the Government’s political officials taking the new Oath at the Emancipation Day ceremony, or within seven (7) days immediately following the commencement of the Constitution Amendment Acts, up to this time of writing there is no indication, no information, and /or no display of such expectations.
Considering the gross disappointments of many citizens about the ‘attitude and approach’ assumed towards the amendment of the Oath of Allegiance, is this failure to deliver on the ritual of taking the new Oath and/ or introducing the ‘new Constitution’ further erodes credibility in Dickon’s NDC-led government?
Interestingly, the Constitution Amendment Acts instruct that following the commencement of the appointed day (01 August 2025), the Oath of Allegiance sworn or solemnly affirmed to by any functionary prior to the appointed day “shall cease to have force”, and such functionary shall … swear or solemnly affirm to ‘the Change’ in the Oath of Allegiance.
Most revealing, this Transitional Procedure as to the Oath Change comes with the further proviso or disclaimer or seeming Escape Clause thus: “if for any reason any functionary did not swear or solemnly affirm to the Oath of Allegiance within those said seven (7) days such functionary shall be deemed to have sworn or solemnly affirmed thereto immediately upon the expiry of those said seven (7) days”.
Does the further proviso absolve the promise for the ritual with the new Oath of Allegiance? How is this explained to the Grenadian-people; is it about political hypocrisy and/or legal technicality?
Whatever the case, this needs to be taken into serious consideration at the occasion for ‘very big’ reforms to the Constitution via a referendum; indeed, “the devil is in the details”.
The leading ‘motivation and momentum’ for the Oath Change is geared on ‘making and mobilising’ anti-colonial sentiments.
At the Emancipation Day celebration, the Prime Minister blends the anti-colonial sentiments with the spirit of the ruling NDC’s Transformation Agenda and validates the pertinent new occurrences within that Agenda.
Dickon remarks that those Amendments are ‘all streams flowing in one direction of charting a bold new course for development, being informed by Grenada’s history and the global realities it faces, building new and mutually beneficial relationships’.
Although being alleged to be the ‘formulator or strategiser’ of NDC’s 2022 Elections Manifesto, it would be instructive to know whether or not the “bold new course for development” being displayed, is within the parameters of the ‘New Age Politics for the New Future’ envisioned by Mr. William Joseph, “for Grenada over the next fifty years”.
Joseph, in attempting to philosophise and articulate, in the Patriotic Vine column, on Leadership and Development, hopes that the ‘NDC will lead big change on behalf of the Grenadian people’.
It has been concluded and accepted that the needed ‘public education and stakeholder consultations and national consensus’ was not featured in the process for the Oath Change; this is the case, as it was anticipated by the powers-that-be that boosting anti-colonial sentiments will suffice.
Anti-Colonial sentiments overshadow all meaningful questions and constructive contributions regarding the process of the Oath Change.
The Beyond The Headlines current affairs programme of the Grenada Broadcasting Network, hosted by Colin Dowe on 14 July 2025 brings out some ‘grey (gray) areas’ with the pursuit for the Oath Change.
Mr. Dowe laboured to get clarifications and settlements on certain salient aspects, including on the wisdom and reality of placing the Oath Change as ‘pivotal’ in advancing Grenada’s Independence.
The thorough edification of the Grenadian people was not had, even by way of delving into the difference and significance of the constitutional Oaths; Oath of Allegiance and Oath of Office.
It is imperative that the powers-that-be realises that the (any) merits of the Oath Change must be beyond arousing anti-colonial sentiments.
Serious devotion should be directed on cultivating in the Grenadian people, especially those who are young, the capacity to appreciate and express patriotism and civility.
To sensationalise the Oath Change and Emancipation without relating nationhood with nation-building and without relating freedom with rights and responsibilities, is to do the nation and its future a disservice.
Even with the moves to ditch the colonial Constitution and its system of governance, the “principles and beliefs which represent those high ideals” upon which Grenada is founded must be ‘cherished and conserved’.
Undoubtedly, another ‘excellent and fruitful’ opportunity to educate the people on reforming the Constitution, was gambled and lost. Particularly, the Grenadian community is no wiser on whether or not the Oath of Allegiance is already sworn to Grenada as raised by the Grenada Monarchist League.
The Grenada Monarchist League challenges the Oath Change, in a Public Statement circulated in May 2024 as “Serious misinformation about oath being peddled by CCR”.
It notes Grenada as a Monarchy, even during the communist regime of the People’s Revolutionary Government (PRG) with the suspension of the Constitution and encourages the Government to disregard the Legislation presented.
The League contends: “…The uprooting of the Oath of Allegiance to the King of Grenada would be entirely superfluous, a-historic, and based entirely on nonsensical arguments which even a cursory analysis of shows do not hold water.
“The Oath of Allegiance as it currently stands is already to Grenada. It is to our Grenadian King, who represents and embodies in his person our Grenadian state.
“It is not an oath to a foreign monarch, and the continued insistence by persons such as Dr. Alexis and the CCR to keep pushing this wholly false narrative is extremely concerning. The Grenada Monarchist League firmly condemned the CCR’s spreading of falsehoods.
“We encourage the government to disregard the legislation presented to them by this organisation, and implore …not to undertake any such superfluous, nonsensical changes …”.
The previous article Grenada Oath Change Neither Here Nor There! aims to stir conscious thoughts as to whether or not substantial consequences are inherent with the Oath Change.
Some individuals would argue that with the process as it was conducted, the Oath Change is about ‘making a mountain out of a molehill (much ado about nothing)’, especially with the political contradictions which are evident.
Critically, the Oath Change has not promoted and provided for Integrity in Public Life towards accountability, transparency, and good governance.
The February 2024 internet-circulated article, The Context And Sense Of Pledging Allegiance To Grenada, points to the need for corresponding the ceremonial Oath-taking with the solemn Oath-serving.
The Oath Change cannot be considered to be a mark of ‘goodwill and good faith’ by the powers-that-be to the Grenadian people, when those Constitution (Oath of Allegiance) (Amendment) Acts by extension, also amend the Oaths Act (Cap 217) to serve the ‘narrow objectives’ but with no considerations to ensure compliance of the Constitution and that Oath-takers be criminally liable for breach of Public Trust and be recalled from constitutional duties.
Anti-colonial sentiments bring the ‘natural obligation’ of securing an alternative form of Government, outside of what has been inherited.
Over the past years of Independence, Grenada like other Caribbean nations, has been gravitating towards Republicanism.
This issue recurs with the address on Reparations, Republicanism and The Rule of Law: What Next After Fifty Years Of Independence? by Dickon Mitchell at the 19th Sir Archibald Nedd Memorial Public Lecture on 22 November 2023, held by the Grenada Bar Association.
Dickon replies to a question on sovereign ‘identity and dignity’ thus: “… the conversation about a constitution by and for the people requires in my view, deep fundamental conversations; it requires education, and it requires providing options … actually saying to people there is the Westminster style, there is the American style, there is the Singaporean model, there is the Chinese model, there is the PRG model … decide whether one or combination of them is better suited for us … from an education point of view and about having the conversation about what type of Government we need for Grenada over the next fifty years, I am happy to have the conversation and to be an advocate for that process …”.
Dickon expounds about the setbacks and disadvantages of the Westminster/Monarchy system of governance and then gives a balanced view about Republicanism.
He asserts thus : “… the issue of republicanism is often spoken of in the context of breaking the chain or the link with our colonial past … and the idea that we should become a republic or the idea about republicanism certainly in the Caribbean has to a large extent been a conversation about removing the office of the Governor-General and replacing it with that of, in brackets, a President. But does that really make a difference?
“My personal opinion is that it does not; and frankly for small states to me it is cumbersome, expensive and undemocratic … So the idea of republicanism, if it is to be meaningful, to me, should reflect one (1), no ceremonial Head of State, certainly in small islands like Grenada. Two (2), whoever becomes Head of State should be directly elected by the people and be accountable to the people; and that means not being accountable to the Legislature.
“That means the Head of State or the Head of the Executive should be elected by the people; those who wish to legislate can certainly also be elected by the people … there is an opportunity for us to examine the Guyana model and to see if it has been successful for Guyana …”.
The realisation of the change to the Oath of Allegiance has been intended to be ‘a precursor or a lead’ in Grenada transforming to a full Republicanism State, with the relinquishment of all vestiges of the colonial past.
Would the CCR and the other proponents now combine resources for the next step in its mission on Constitution Reform, taking on board the pertinent pronouncements delivered by Prime Minister Dickon Mitchell at the Memorial Public Lecture?
If Dr. Francis Alexis KC is genuine about building a Grenada of “One Nation, One Future, One Allegiance”, without corrupting Bob Marley’s Redemption line:
“Emancipate yourself from mental slavery” as well as without corrupting anti-colonial sentiments, then he must ‘swear’ for the article Alexis Should Concede For An Open University On Grenada Constitution.
J.K. Roberts