Recently, Jerry Edwin has been telling us a story about Dr. Eric Williams, to create the fallacy that in principle he opposed the establishment of the Caribbean Court of Justice.
Generally, the story goes like this. Someone asked Dr. Williams about the court in 1976, and Dr. Williams had replied that if two people are fighting in one house, it is better to have an outsider to settle the dispute. He has made this statement on radio, and has written it in articles published in our local newspapers.
Edwin, who appears to be a member of the bandwagon of political regression, tells this story to prove that Dr. Williams was a lifelong opponent of the CCJ, and if he was alive today, he would opt for the British Privy Council ahead of it.
But even if Edwin’s story is true, this does not necessarily follow.
Perhaps people like Edwin do not mentally change and grow; they remain fixated on one set of ideas and the same mental orientation throughout their lives.
Dr. Williams died in 1981. The agreement by Caribbean governments to establish the CCJ, of which Trinidad was a part was signed in 2001.
The court was established in 2005, twenty-four years after Dr. Williams’ death. If Dr. Williams was alive today, it would have been forty years since he made the statement Edwin attributes to him.
I refuse to believe that Dr. Williams, one of the Caribbean most profound intellects, who authored over a dozen books, had the kind of mentality Edwin wants to attribute to him. Indeed, if Edwin was interested he would have seen much evidence that Williams was a man who frequently changed his mind. More research would have made him more ready to draw less biased conclusions, as well as make him realise that generally Caribbean people’s mental awareness have increased greatly since 1962, and they have become nationalistic.
One of the best examples of how sometimes Dr. Williams had a change of heart about things involves some words he said on Trinidad’s Independence Day in August 1962. During his Independence speech, he said to the Queen’s representative: “I want you to convey to Her Majesty our expression of unfailing loyalty and devotion to her throne and person.” However, 14 years later that loyalty failed, when Williams, who we are told was never comfortable with Metropolitan hand-downs, pioneered the movement of Trinidad to a republic, so that Trinidadians could begin to express their unfailing loyalty, not to an alien monarch, but to themselves, and so regain some of their lost human dignity.
National sovereignty is a highly important human rights issue. Human rights issues are always at the same time moral issues. Inconsolidating the the independence/self-determination of Trinidadians, as well as the fact, that he turned down a knighthood from the Queen, Dr. Williams proved that he was a person of intellectual and moral integrity.
It was not moral act for some of our politicians to tell Grenadians to vote “no” on November 6 to the referendum Bill. All Grenadians had a moral obligation to vote “yes” for it.
I am trying to understand the motive for Edwin getting on the bandwagon of political regression. His gross fallacy here must make people wonder if his professional competence is not suspect. I am asking Mr. Edwin who suggests that he has a commitment to educate Grenadians in political and judicial matters, and other lawyers who are interested, to go back to the 2016 referendum Bill about the CCJ, and examine part 10, where it says: Schedule 3 in the Constitution is altered in the Oath of Allegiance by deleting the words “Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, her heirs and successors”, and by substituting the word “Grenada”, and explain fully to Grenadians what these words proposed.
Readiness is always important as leaders of the NDC and others seem to accept, and these people must take their own advice. Therefore, the NDC must ready itself for winning elections by solving its leadership crisis as soon as possible.
I suggest that they adopt a similar solution as the St. Lucia Labour Party (SLP), some years ago, when they had a similar leadership problem. The SLP wooed Dr. Kenny Anthony, a Senior lecturer, away from U.W.I., to become leader of the party. This did bring a certain measure of strength and stability to the SLP.
Also, to increase its readiness, the NDC should replace Claudette Joseph as its caretaker/candidate for the town of St. George. People who can face reality will accept that it is highly unlikely she will ever win this seat as long as Peter David is the NNP candidate there.
The NDC needs to find someone else who can present a greater challenge to Peter David. Power is the name of the game of partisan politics, and this entails winning elections. The party must also take another look at Phillip Alexander in St. Andrew’s North West, because he does not seem to fit the part.
Some time ago Brenda Baptiste on GBN asked Alexander, in what ways he thought NNP and NDC were similar, and he came up with the rather unintelligent answer, that he couldn’t think of any way they were similar. An answer like this could hardly inspire voter confidence in him and in the NDC.
Devonson LaMothe