1 of 105

Office of The Minister of Transport & Aviation

P O Box N-7132, 3rd Floor, Manx Corporate Centre, West Bay Street, Nassau, Bahamas

T: 1-242-397-5529 328-2701-5 322-4546 F: 328-1324

E: pompeybay@hotmail.com or barbarampinder@hotmail.com (Secretary)

PRESENTATION TO HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY

BY

THE HON. GLENYS HANNA MARTIN

MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT

FOR THE ENGLERSTON CONSTITUENCY

ON THE AMENDMENT

TO THE CONSTITUTION BILLS

House of Assembly

Nassau, Bahamas

Wednesday, 6 August, 2014

Mr Speaker, I rise on behalf of Bahamians everywhere

to move the second reading of –

2 of 105

1) The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment Bill

2014

2) The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) (No.

2) Bill 2014

3) The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) (No.

3) Bill 2014

4) The Bahamas Constitution Amendment) (No. 4)

Bill

5) The Status of Children (Amendment) Bill 2014

I again thank the good people of Englerston who have

allowed me to sit in this Honourable House and to be

able to stand in this place on this morning to move a

second reading of these Bills.

3 of 105

Mr Speaker, I wish to begin before commencing this

important debate, by first thanking the Bahamian

athletes who comprised the Bahamian team and

represented our country at the recent Commonwealth

Games in Scotland.

Please allow me to especially commend the historic

silver medal win by Arianna Vanderpool Wallace in the

50 metres butterfly swimming event and the new

national record set in that event and the silver medal

win of the men’s 4 x 400 metres relay team and for

me, especially Chris Brown.

In the case of Arianna’s spectacular medal

performance, one of the daily newspapers reports that

while being interviewed tears flowed and she is

4 of 105

quoted as saying she hoped that the Bahamian people

will understand just how precious the moment has

been for her.

#“I wanted it so badly for the Bahamas, not just for

myself,” she said as her voice started to crack with

emotion. “I had a chance to put the Bahamas on the

map and to make people realise that we are a force to

reckon with.

#“We had all of the other swimmers swimming here

and doing exceptionally well, so its been a great meet

for the Bahamas.”

#“Thanks to everybody for their support. I’ve been

getting a lot of Twitter messages, Facebook

messages and emails from people all over the world

5 of 105

that I’ve never met before, but you have been rooting

for me coming from such a small country,” she

summed up. “So it means a lot to me.”

Mr Speaker, we note in her comments the recurring

reference to “we” and how she perceives her

achievement as a collective one shared by us, the

“we.”

We in this country have been watching and speaking

nationally about this young woman perhaps from the

days of her pre-teens: she has over the years shown

such determination, audacity and courage in seeking

to break new ground for our country. She has done

this and Mr. Speaker, we are not talking track and

6 of 105

field, we are speaking of swimming. She is a

trailblazer.

Mr Speaker, I wish also to use this moment to say a

little something of Chris Brown, who, in my humble

opinion, epitomizes much of what is good in our

country.

Over time he has become more focused.

He has exhibited greater professional maturity.

He has become more skilled in his craft, while at the

same time honing his leadership abilities,

purposefully mentoring new and up and coming

athletes.

7 of 105

All the while, with each success, each groundbreaking

milestone, he has maintained his humility and

constantly exhibited dignity and sober pride in being

Bahamian. He has become an exceedingly admirable

person, indeed an inspiration in our country’s

development.

The one constant has been the “heart” he has

exhibited on the track: wearing the colours of this

nation which appears as nothing more than little dots

on the world globe;

He has the heart of a giant: the heart of a champion

which is so reflective of the spirit of the Bahamian

people.

It is that same heart we see in young Arianna.

8 of 105

In the case of both Arianna and Chris Brown we know

the victory is not simply personal to these individuals

but are achievements made for and on behalf of the

Bahamian people. That is why they speak of the “we”

and not the “I.”

It is the examples of the likes of citizens such as

Arianna Vanderpool Wallace and Chris Brown and the

so many others in all the spheres of human

endeavour, in the arts and sciences, in cultural

exposition, in the daily service to our people and the

greater good that are powerful reminders and a

material reiteration that we have such a wonderful

country.

9 of 105

It is no accident that in the beginning of this

presentation I have used these two examples as a

foreword to this debate on citizenship and on the men

and women citizens of this country.

It is intentional that I have sought to refer to that

intangible that powerfully connects us as a people.

I have spoken of these two incredible athletes

although there are many examples in our national life.

Indeed these references are key to my case.

Mr Speaker, to us, The Bahamas is special.

We have our many vexing challenges and it is

because we love and care for and greatly value this

country that we do experience grave concern in the

face of these challenges; however, Mr Speaker, we

must always keep central to our focus that despite

10 of 105

these challenges at the core we have a great nation

and a gifted people: a marvellous citizenry.

And even after 41 years of Independence as we as a

people seek to continue shaping our country and

properly defining our national identity: we at the same

time continue to ensure that our values and mores are

strengthened and sustained.

We endeavour to ensure a society undergirded by

equity, justice and fairness and to coerce a humane

society in which all of our people find a place of

wholeness and peace.

Mr Speaker this cannot be mere rhetoric spewed in

this Parliament but an absolute and faithful

commitment to the healthy growth of our nation.

11 of 105

This business of purposefully and consciously

shaping and moulding and defining and refining our

country is especially important if we reflect upon the

historical evolution of this country and its people.

Indeed just two days ago we commemorated the

anniversary of the freeing of slaves who were

descended from Africa, our ancestors, by the public

holiday called Emancipation Day.

At one time we diplomatically called it “August

Monday” but the name “Emancipation” reiterates our

journey and places a contextual reminder of our duty

to be good to one another.

This is not fantasy or politics or anything other than

an historical fact.

12 of 105

The Debate today begins yet another critical step in

the purposeful shaping of our social reality, in the

pursuit of equity, fairness, justice, equality.

We are reminded too that this debate is one based on

conscience.

There is no whip on any member of this House, at

least not on this side of the House. Each member will

speak to the Bills in accord with his or her

conscience.

Mr Speaker, fundamentally the Bills before this House

touch and concern two highly important and sensitive

issues: that of full equality under our constitution

between men and women citizens and secondly the

13 of 105

issue of citizenship itself: these two issues are largely

intertwined in these Bills.

Mr. Speaker, the issue of citizenship is an extremely

emotive issue: it is one that is very personal and

intimate to the psychi of our people and in its impact

to a country and it is a turf of which Bahamians are

highly protective.

The fact, therefore that this issue is now upon the

table for decision-making is a matter of great import.

It is one that all Bahamians who are eligible to vote

must participate in.

Each voice must be heard and counted in this matter

as it touches upon entrenched provisions of our

14 of 105

Constitution and goes to the core of our national

reality.

This is not a PLP/ FNM/ DNA moment: those moments

come every 5 years and lots and lots in between.

This, however, is a moment that is many ways rare

and will be of a most enduring and deeply

transformative effect.

Today begins therefore a very critical intervention in

our nation’s history and in our social evolution as a

people.

It is very serious business.

We are today moving amendments to specific clauses

of our Constitution: these are what are called

“entrenched” clauses of our constitution.

15 of 105

These are not ordinary provisions and the

Constitution provides for an extraordinary procedure

should at any time there be an effort to amend or in

any way alter such entrenched provisions.

Article 54 (1) of the Constitution provides-

Subject to the provisions of this Article,

Parliament may, by an Act of Parliament passed by

both Houses, alter any of the provisions of this

Constitution or

(in so far as it forms part of the law of The Bahamas)

any of the provisions of The Bahamas Independence

Act, 1973.

The Article further outlines a number of Articles in the

Constitution including those under consideration

today namely Articles 8, 9, 10, 14, 26 and prescribes a

16 of 105

special procedure for the alteration of these

provisions.

The provisions mentioned relate to the transmission

of citizenship (Articles 8, 9, 10, 14) and the clause

prohibiting discrimination (Article 26) which is among

the protections of the fundamental rights and

freedoms under the Constitution,

Article 54 states that where such provisions are

sought to be altered as follows;-

A Bill for an Act of Parliament under this Article shall

not be passed by Parliament unless —

(i) at the final voting thereon in each House it is

supported by the votes of not less than three

quarters of all the members of each House; and

(ii) the Bill, after its passage through both Houses

17 of 105

has been submitted to the electors qualified to

vote for the election of members of the House

of Assembly and, on a vote taken in such

manner as Parliament may prescribe the

majority of the electors voting have approved

the Bill.

Our Constitution makes these provisions

“entrenched” that is that they cannot be altered by

any ordinary Parliamentary process and provides that

any amendment to these specific clauses must first be

passed by a mandatory 3/4ths vote taken in both this

House and the Senate but thereafter and further a

referendum of the People must be held who will be

called upon as provided for in our Constitution to vote

‘yes’ or ‘no’ to the proposed amendments.

18 of 105

A simple majority of voters will determine the

outcome.

This extended process is therefore mandated by the

Constitution as it relates to those provisions that

touch upon the principles of citizenship and the

fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual and

which are entrenched in our Constitution.

Today begins that process but in truth the process

began before today.

This is not the first attempt at constitutional reform of

entrenched provisions in this country since

Independence: We will recall that in February 2002 a

constitutional referendum was held to seek to alter a

19 of 105

number of Articles including the entrenched

provisions in question today namely Articles 8 and 9

and 10 along with an array of other issues of

constitutional reform such as the Boundaries

Commission and the retirement age of judges, among

other things.

Mr Speaker, I have my own views as to why that effort

was not successful but in the interest of avoiding

controversial ground and because both sides of this

House have committed to unanimity in this process to

avoid a political divide as Bahamians soberly consider

what is before them , I will simply quote from the

Report of the Constitutional Commission which seeks

to place the previous attempt in context and I quote:-

“It is not the place of this Commission to attempt to

speculate as to the reasons for the failure of the 2002

20 of 105

national referendum. Observers of the process,

including academics, political scientists, and voters

have referred to a confluence of events—

contamination of the referendum by other political

controversies; the imminence of a general election;

decidedly mixed feelings among the electorate as to

the citizenship-related aspects of the gender-equality

issue; the complexity of the Bills; and the lack of

public education— all of which may have played a part

in varying degrees of importance. The Commission

merely records these observations in passing

because, as has been highlighted in the foreword, the

2002 referendum (as well as the more recent gambling

referendum) has important implications for the

process of constitutional reform on which we have

embarked. This is particularly so when illuminated by

21 of 105

the recent response of Caribbean electorates to

referenda (some of which are referred to in the body

of the report). The Commission has taken onboard

the lessons of these failed processes. They dare not

be ignored”.

And Mr Speaker, for clarity, however, and to avoid any

confusion the gambling referendum referred to in that

quote was not a national constitutional referendum

and was therefore not legally binding.

The national constitutional referendum which is to

take place after this debate after having attained

3/4ths vote in both houses of parliament and

pursuant to Article 54 of the Constitution is, however,

legally binding on all and, if agreed upon by a majority

22 of 105

of the voters, will lead forthwith to an amendment to

the Constitution or otherwise depending on the

outcome of the vote.

Amendments are to come into operation on the day of

publication in the gazette of the result of the

referendum showing that a majority of voters have

approved the Bills. The effect will not be retroactive.

This , I believe, highlights the importance of every

eligible voter ensuring their voice is heard in the

matter of their constitution.

I believe the point which the Commission sought to

make, however, is that “process” is important in the

undertaking of such an exercise especially as it

relates to the Constitution and especially in relation to

23 of 105

entrenched provisions of the constitution and that the

outcome prior exercises are lessons learned.

Process in constitutional reform is not only

absolutely critical, it is mandatory.

Mr. Speaker, in August 2012 a Constitutional

Commission was appointed by the Prime Minister.

In a Communication to Parliament the Prime Minister

said

“I wish to inform this Honourable House and the

general public that my government has appointed a

new Constitutional Commission to conduct a

comprehensive review of the Constitution of The

Bahamas, and to recommend changes to the

Constitution in advance of the 40th anniversary of

Independence next year. These changes will require a

24 of 105

national referendum to be held in due course so that

the will of the people can be determined on the matter.

Former Attorney-General, Sean McWeeney, QC, will be

the chairman of the Constitutional Commission. Mr.

Loren Klein, Chief Counsel in the Chambers of the

Attorney-General, will, in addition to being a member,

serve as the technical co-ordinator of the

Commission's Secretariat. The other members of the

Commission will be former Attorney-General and

former Minister of Education, Mr. Carl Bethel, Mrs.

Rubie Nottage, Mr. Mark Wilson, Mr. Lester Mortimer,

Mrs. Tara Cooper-Burnside, Mr. Michael Stevenson,

Dr. Olivia Saunders, Mr. Michael Albury, Ms. Chandra

Sands, Ms. Brandace Duncanson and Mrs. Carla

Brown-Roker.

25 of 105

At the end of its work, almost one year later, the

Commission produced a report which was delivered in

July of last year on the nation’s 40th anniversary of

Independence.

The Report describes the process undertaken by the

Commission in its wide-ranging consultation with the

Bahamian people.

The Commission in its Report advises that the primary

source for obtaining public feedback was by way of

holding public meetings, 30 meetings in all which the

Report says was attended in total by some 2,183

persons. These meetings were held in Nassau and in

all of the major inhabited islands of The Bahamas.

26 of 105

Additionally the Commission established a webpage

on the main Government web site which established

links relevant to the issues and posted written

submissions for the consideration of the general

public.

Further representatives of the Commission attended

broadcast and talk shows to share pertinent

information and to receive feedback from callers. The

Report indicates that the Commission invited private

individuals, special interest groups and civil society

generally to submit written recommendations to the

Commission.

The preparation for possible constitutional reform has

therefore been the subject of lengthy, prolonged and

27 of 105

extensive dialogue using multimedia, diverse

approach strategies and touching every major

inhabited island throughout our archipelago.

Out of this process came a number of

recommendations for reform and I will come later to

those recommendations which form the basis of the

Bills before this Honourable House today.

Mr Speaker, Our Constitution is the Supreme law of

our Commonwealth.

Its contents is the product of a collective vision for

our country forged by our nation’s founding fathers

and concluded in December 1972 at the Bahamas

Independence Conference in London, England just

28 of 105

months before our national independence on July 10th

1973.

This independence conference followed a General

Election in which the then government in seeking re-

election campaigned upon the singular issue of

national independence:

Mr Speaker, the Bahamian people spoke loud and

clear providing the then government with a mandate

of 29 of a total of 38 seats.

The Bahamian people decided in clear terms upon a

course of national sovereignty.

At that Conference in London on behalf of the

Bahamian people was a group of men forming a bi-

29 of 105

partisan delegation and now referred to as the

“framers of the constitution”. This delegation

comprised the then Premier Lynden Pindling our

nation’s first Prime Minister and today known as the

father of our country and who led the government

delegation of Arthur D. Hanna, Milo Butler, Carlton

Francis, Clement T Maynard, Paul Adderley, George

A. Smith, Loftus Roker, Philip Bethel, Cadwell

Armbrister and Henry Bowen and the opposition

delegation led by Kendal G. L. Isaacs and comprising

Arthur Foulkes, Orville Turnquest and Norman

Solomon. Mr Speaker it is of note that only 6 of this

original 15 member delegation are alive today.

.

The new constitution which was concluded at that

conference in December 1972, came into effect in July

30 of 105

1973 upon our national independence and it provided

the legal framework for a new and sovereign Bahamas

and included, inter alia, entrenched provisions on how

citizenship is attained, entrenched provisions for the

protection of the fundamental rights and freedoms of

the individual, provisions regarding our institutions of

government, the Parliament, the Executive, the

Judiciary and the Public Service.

It was the document which was to provide the

framework for and to further define our new nation

and its goals.

It marked the inception of our national identity as a

sovereign nation.

31 of 105

Our Constitution therefore sits solidly front and

central in our national existence.

The first Article the Constitution provides that The

Commonwealth of The Bahamas shall be a Sovereign

Democratic State.

Article 2. declares that our Constitution is the

supreme law of the Commonwealth of The Bahamas

and, subject to the provisions of the Constitution, if

any other law is inconsistent with the Constitution,

this Constitution (our Constitution) shall prevail and

the other law shall, to the extent of the inconsistency,

be void. That is the provisions of the Constitution are

the supreme law of our Commonwealth which no law

can contravene.

32 of 105

Article 30, however, anticipated that there were

existing laws which would be preserved and not

found to be inconsistent with Articles 16 to 27 which

embody what is known as the fundamental rights and

freedoms provisions.)

The Articles we have placed before the Bahamian

people for alteration with the support of both sides of

this House as demonstrated in the Communications of

the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition

two weeks ago are the entrenched Articles which

provide for the transmission of citizenship and for the

elimination of discrimination based on sex.

Specifically:

33 of 105

1) The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) Bill 2014,

the first Bill seeks to repeal and replace Article 8 and

repeal completely article 9 of the constitution.

Article 8 of our Constitution states that -

8. A person born outside The Bahamas after 9th July

1973 shall become a citizen of The Bahamas at the

date of his birth if at that date his father is a citizen of

The Bahamas otherwise than by virtue of this Article

or Article 3(2) of this Constitution.

Mr. Speaker Article 3(2) a savings provision which

provides for persons born within marriage but outside

of The Bahamas before 1973 .

This Bill seeks to repeal Article 9 which provides that

9. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in Article

34 of 105

8 of this Constitution, a person born legitimately

outside The Bahamas after 9th July 1973 whose

mother is a citizen of The Bahamas shall be entitled,

upon making application on his attaining the age of

eighteen years and before he attains the age of

twenty-one years, in such manner as may be

prescribed, to be registered as a citizen of The

Bahamas: Provided that if he is a citizen of some

country other than The Bahamas he shall not be

entitled to be registered as a citizen of The Bahamas

under this Article unless he renounces his citizenship

of that other country, takes the oath of allegiance and

makes and registers such declaration of his intentions

concerning residence as may be prescribed.

(2) Where a person cannot renounce his citizenship of

35 of 105

some other country under the law of that country, he

may instead make such declaration concerning that

citizenship as may be prescribed.

(3) Any application for registration under this Article

shall be subject to such exceptions or qualifications

as may be prescribed in the interests of national

security or public policy.

Article 8 deals with a child born outside The Bahamas

to a Bahamian father of his foreign wife and Article 9

deals with a child born to a Bahamian mother and a

foreign father within marriage outside the jurisdiction

of The Bahamas.

In the case of the Bahamian born father citizenship is

automatically transmitted to the child but in the case

36 of 105

of the Bahamian born mother the child does not take

his mother’s citizenship although he may apply to be

registered between the ages of 18 to 21 years with the

conditions I have set out including being subject to

the interests of national security and public policy.

So Mr Speaker, if for example Mary Baxter nee Rolle, a

Bahamian woman married Bert Baxter, a non

Bahamian, and gave birth to a child of that union say

in Miami, Florida in the United States, that child, would

not be permitted to take his mother’s nationality

except as previously stated the child would be entitled

to apply between the ages of 18 to 21 for registration

as a Bahamian but must first renounce his citizenship.

However, if your George Bain, a Bahamian man had a

child in similar circumstances, i.e born outside of The

37 of 105

Bahamas to a foreign wife , that child will take

automatically his father’s Bahamian citizenship.

Article 8 therefore refers to a Bahamian man married

to a foreign wife only and does not include a

Bahamian woman married to a foreign man as she is

not able to transmit citizenship to her child except

under the conditions I have referred to and contained

in Article 9.

In the case of a single Bahamian woman, however,

who gives birth to a child out of wedlock in a foreign

country or at home by virtue of Article 14, that child

automatically takes its mother’s nationality but this is

not so in the case as it relates to a single Bahamian

father who in no circumstance is able to transmit

citizenship to his child:-

38 of 105

The Constitution provides that a Bahamian woman

who gives birth to a child out of wedlock can pass

citizenship to her child but no such right exists for a

Bahamian man who fathers a child out of wedlock

This is as I have said, by virtue of Article 14 which

provides –

. (1) Any reference in this Chapter to the father of a

person shall, in relation to any person born out of

wedlock other than a person legitimated before 10th

July 1973, be construed as a reference to the mother

of that person.

A child born out of wedlock takes her mother’s

citizenship.

And so there are cases where Bahamian men have

fathered children out of wedlock with non Bahamian

39 of 105

women: those children are not citizens of The

Bahamas whether they were born in or outside The

Bahamas but will take their mothers nationality

whatever that will be.

The provisions of both Articles 8 and 9 are addressed

in The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) Bill 2014

the effect of which is removing Article 9 completely

and altering Article 8 and providing that

“ A person born outside The Bahamas shall become a

citizen at the date of his birth if at that date his father

or mother is a citizen of The Bahamas otherwise than

by virtue of this Article or Article 3 (2) or Article 10 of

the constitution”

In other words only if the mother or father is a born

Bahamian and has not acquired citizenship by

40 of 105

marriage or by being born outside the jurisdiction of

The Bahamas.

The EFFECT of this Bill is to allow Bahamian born

men and Bahamian born women to have equal

capacity to automatically transmit their citizenship to

their children in circumstances where their children

are born outside the Bahamas.

The second Bill to which I refer to is The Bahamas

Constitution (Amendment ) (No 3) Bill 2014 which

seeks to amend this very provision i.e. Article 14,

which I have just alluded to by deleting paragraph 1 in

full and redefining that the meaning of “father” in

relation to a child born out of wedlock.

The Bill states that “father” in relation to a child born

out of wedlock means a person who is proved in a

41 of 105

manner recognized in law to be the father of that

child; This is to allow for a Bahamian man to pass

citizenship to his child in all circumstances including

a child born out of wedlock or out of The Bahamas.

The Bill also provides for such a child to take his

father’s citizenship if that child is born after the death

of his father if his father was a Bahamian citizen at the

time of his death.

Mr. Speaker, it is further proposed to properly

supplement this provision that the Status of Children

Act be further amended in the Status of Children

(Amendment ) Bill 2014 to remove the one significant

remaining distinction between children born within

42 of 105

marriage and without by deleting the exceptions of

citizenship .

For the practical purposes of law there will therefore

be no remaining distinction between children born in

wedlock and those born outside of wedlock.

There will be a further amendment to create a more

stringent or higher test for proof of paternity in the

matter of citizenship than is currently provided for

under that Act.

At this time section 7 of the Status of Children Act

governs proof of paternity which provides

(1) Unless the contrary is proven on a balance of

probabilities, there is a presumption that a male

person is,

43 of 105

and shall be recognised in law to be, the father of a

child in any one of the following circumstances —

(a) the person was married to the mother of the

child at the time of its birth;

(b) the person was married to the mother of the

child and that marriage was terminated by death

or judgment of nullity within 280 days before

the birth of the child, or by divorce where the

decree nisi was granted within 280 days before

the birth of the child;

(c) the person marries the mother of the child after

the birth of the child and acknowledges that he

is the natural father;

(d) the person was cohabiting with the mother of the

child in a relationship of some permanence at

the time of the birth of the child, or the child is

44 of 105

born within 280 days after they ceased to

cohabit;

(e) the person has been adjudged or recognised in

his lifetime by a court of competent jurisdiction

to be the father of the child;

(f) the person has, by affidavit sworn before a

justice of the peace or a notary public or by

other document duly attested and sealed,

together with a declaration by the mother of the

child contained in the same instrument

confirming that the person is the father of the

child, admitted paternity, but such affidavit or

other document shall be of no effect unless it has

been recorded with the Registrar General;

(g) the person has acknowledged in proceedings for

registration of the child, in accordance with the

45 of 105

law relating to the registration of births, that he

is the father of the child;

(h) the mother of the child and a person

acknowledging that he is the father of the child

have signed and executed a deed to this effect in

the presence of a counsel and attorney, but such

a deed shall be of no effect unless it is notarised

and recorded with the Registrar General prior to

the death of the person acknowledging himself

to be the father;

(i) a person who is alleged to be the father of the

child has given written consent to that child

adopting his name in accordance with the law

relating to the change of name; or

(j) a person who is alleged to be the father of the

child has by his conduct implicitly and

46 of 105

consistently acknowledged that he is the father

of the child.

(2) Where circumstances exist that give rise to

presumptions of paternity in respect of more than one

father, no presumption shall be made as to paternity.

Mr Speaker the amendment proposed excludes these

various tests and provides for the transmission of

citizenship through a proven blood or DNA connection

- see amendment

The amendments proposed therefore to Articles 8 and

14 and the repeal of Article 9 and the consequent

amendment of the Status of Children Act as aforesaid

will allow for both Bahamian born men and Bahamian

born women to pass on citizenship to their children

47 of 105

whether in or out of marriage and whether born in or

outside The Bahamas. Provisions related to the

transmission of citizenship to children.

The two remaining proposed changes are contained

in The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) (No 2) Bill

2014 and The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) (no

4) Bill 2014.

The first of these remaining two Bills namely The

Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) (No 2) Bill 2014

addresses the issue of citizenship to the foreign

spouses of Bahamian citizens and seeks to repeal and

replace Article 10 of the Constitution.

Article 10 provides –

48 of 105

10. Any woman who, after 9th July 1973, marries a

person who is or becomes a citizen of The Bahamas

shall be entitled, provided she is still so married, upon

making application in such manner as may be

prescribed and upon taking the oath of allegiance or

such declaration as may be prescribed, to be

registered as a citizen of The Bahamas: Provided that

the right to be registered as a citizen of The Bahamas

under this Article shall be subject to such exceptions

or qualifications as may be prescribed in the interests

of national security or public policy.

In short the foreign wife of a Bahamian man is entitled

upon application and upon taking the oath of

allegiance to be registered as a citizen of The

Bahamas by virtue of her marriage to a Bahamian man

49 of 105

although that right is subject to any exceptions or

qualifications in the interests of national security or

public policy.

The corresponding right does not exist in the case of

a Bahamian woman married to a foreign man pure and

simple.

It is proposed to repeal this Bill by the following :-

Article 10 (1)

Any man or woman who marries a person who is or

becomes a citizen of The Bahamas shall, subject to

paragraph (2) and any other prescribed condition, be

entitled, upon making application in such manner as

may be prescribed and upon taking the oath of

50 of 105

allegiance, or such declaration as may be prescribed,

to be registered as a citizen of The Bahamas.

(2) A person any be denied registration under this

Article if –

(a) there is satisfactory evidence that –

(i) the marriage no longer subsists;

(ii) the marriage was entered into for the purpose of

enabling that person to acquire citizenship of The

Bahamas or;

(iii) the parties to the marriage have no intention of

permanently co-habiting with each other as spouses,

after marriage;

(b) the person has been convicted in any country of

an indictable criminal offence involving moral

51 of 105

turpitude (TO BE AMENDED) and national security or

public policy exceptions

(3) Paragraph (2) shall not affect the right of any

person who, before the date of this paragraph was

entitled to apply for citizenship of The Bahamas by

virtue of any provision of this Constitution in force

before that date.”

The Act comes into effect on the date the result of the

referendum is published in the gazette showing

approval by a majority of voters and is therefore NOT

RETROACTIVE

This amendment allows for the foreign spouse of any

“person” (the removal of the word ‘man’ to mean any

Bahamian man or Bahamian woman or any man or

52 of 105

woman who becomes a Bahamian citizen shall be

entitled to be registered as a citizen of The Bahamas

but subject herein to THE CONDITIONS contained

therein. The effect is to extend to Bahamian women

the same right now accorded to Bahamian men for

their spouses to be registered as citizens.

In Summary and to reiterate 4 of the 5 Bills before this

House namely The Bahamas Constitution

(Amendment ) Bill, 2014, The Bahamas Constitution

(Amendment) (N0. 2) The Bahamas Constitution (No.

3) and the amendment proposed to the Status of

Children Act propose that those provisions in the

Constitution should be amended to permit for the

child of a Bahamian woman who is married to a

foreign man born in a country other than The

53 of 105

Bahamas to be able to take his mother’s Bahamian

nationality. and for the child born out of wedlock to a

Bahamian father in or outside of The Bahamas to be

permitted to take his father’s nationality and for the

foreign spouses of both Bahamian men and women to

have an entitlement to citizenship subject to their

applying, taking the oath of allegiance and subject to

the specific scrutiny to assure the legitimacy of the

marriage and to ensure no fraud is being perpetrated

to obtain citizenship. And in the interest of national

security and subject to public policy.

None of these provisions will operate retroactively

although the Prime Minister has foreshadowed in his

Communication to this House two weeks ago that the

government will as a matter of administrative policy

grant citizenship to children born outside of The

54 of 105

Bahamas to Bahamian born mothers married to non

Bahamian father subject to the exceptions and

procedures already provided for by law.

Mr. Speaker the amending provisions prohibit fraud or

the purported purchase or fraudulent facilitation of

this sacred status of “Bahamian” citizenship through

what might be called a marriage of convenience. This

will apply to spouses of both Bahamian men and

women and extends the scope of the Article to include

the spouses of Bahamian women but also tightens up

the long-standing provision relative to Bahamian men

married to foreign women putting in place provisions

in each case to avoid fraud which heretofore did not

exist in our constitution. And while as the prime

55 of 105

minister noted this was already the practice, this

protection will now be enshrined in the constitution..

Mr. Speaker the final amendment proposed comes by

way of The Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) (No.

4) Bill, 2014. This Bill seeks to amend Article 26 of the

Constitution. That Article provides –

26. (1) Subject to the provisions of paragraphs (4), (5)

and (9) of this Article, no law shall make any provision

which is discriminatory either of itself or in its effect.

(2) Subject to the provisions of paragraphs (6), (9) and

(10) of this Article, no person shall be treated in a

discriminatory manner by any person acting by virtue

of any written law or in the performance of the

functions of any public office or any public authority.

56 of 105

(3) In this Article, the expression “discriminatory”

means affording different treatment to different

persons attributable wholly or mainly to their

respective descriptions by race, place of origin,

political opinions, colour or creed whereby persons of

one such description are subjected to disabilities or

restrictions to which persons of another such

description are not made subject or are accorded

privileges or advantages which are not accorded to

persons of another such description.

Mr Speaker, you will note this does not speak to

discrimination on the basis of ‘sex”.

However, the Article provides exceptions to the

protection from discrimination

57 of 105

(4) Paragraph (1) of this Article shall not apply to any

law so far as that law makes provision —

(a) for the appropriation of revenues or other funds of

The Bahamas or for the imposition of taxation

(including the levying of fees for the grant of

licences); or

(b) with respect to the entry into or exclusion from, or

the employment, engaging in any business or

profession, movement or residence within, The

Bahamas of persons who are not citizens of The

Bahamas; or

(c) with respect to adoption, marriage, divorce, burial,

devolution of property on death or other matters of

personal law; or

58 of 105

(d) whereby persons of any such description as is

mentioned in paragraph (3) of this Article may be

subjected to any disability or restriction or may be

accorded any privilege or advantage which, having

regard to its nature and to special circumstances

pertaining to those persons or to persons of any other

such description, is reasonably justifiable in a

democratic society; or

(e) for authorising the granting of licences or

certificates permitting the conduct of a lottery, the

keeping of a gaming house or the carrying on of

gambling in any of its forms subject to conditions

which impose upon persons who are citizens of The

59 of 105

Bahamas disabilities or restrictions to which other

persons are not made subject.

(5) Nothing contained in any law shall be held to be

inconsistent with or in contravention of paragraph (1)

of this Article to the extent that it makes provision

with respect to standards or qualifications (not being

a standard or qualification specifically relating to race,

place c) in order to be eligible for service as a public

officer or as a member of a disciplined force or for the

service of a local government authority or a body

corporate established by law for public purposes.

The protection from discrimination on the basis of

race, place of origin, political opinions, colour or

creed is subject to exceptions but nowhere speaks to

protection from discrimination based upon sex; The

60 of 105

Bahamas Constitution (Amendment) (No. 4) Bill 2014

amendment seeks to add the word “sex” along with

the other matters so as to make it unconstitutional to

discriminate in The Bahamas on the basis of sex but

as stated earlier subject to the existing exceptions in

paragraph (4) of Article 26 generally which alludes to

matters of taxation and revenue, matters related to

non-citizens relative to employment (economic

policy), profession (Bar), movement or residence

within The Bahamas, with respect to adoption,

marriage, divorce, burial, devolution of property on

death or other matters of personal law and gambling

and subject to the savings provision of Article 30 that

I previously referred to as laws enacted before the

date of the Constitution that will continue to have

61 of 105

effect even though inconsistent with the terms of the

constitution.

Mr. Speaker, from what I am hearing, this Bill in

particular has been the subject of some debate in

some quarters.

In the prime minister’s communication he specifically

articulated that this Bill will not make same sex

marriages lawful.

for those who are concerned that this provision now

opens the door for same sex marriages it is important

to note that the amendment continues as is the

current position to provide for the constitutionality of

laws currently in force and to be enacted which

discriminate on the basis of sex as it relates to

62 of 105

marriage: that so-called discrimination is provided for

in the Matrimonial Causes Act –

21. (1) A marriage shall be void on any of the

following grounds:

(a) that it is not a valid marriage in accordance with

the provisions of the Marriage Act;

(b) that at the time of the marriage, either party was

already lawfully married;

(c) that the parties are not respectively male and

female;

63 of 105

Mr. Speaker, the provision which seeks to prohibit

discrimination in our country on the basis of “sex” is

also in accord with our prior commitments

internationally : we note that on 6th October 1993,

The Bahamas ratified the United Nations Convention

on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination

against women (known as the CEDAW Convention) ,

however, at that time we secured reservations

indicating that The Bahamas did not consider itself

bound to provisions calling for the end of

discrimination against women in our Constitution nor

the mandate to give to women equal rights to men

with respect to nationality of their children. Mr

Speaker this was no doubt to preserve the then

existing provisions of our Constitution which could

not be altered other than by referendum of the people

64 of 105

after having obtained a 3/4ths vote in both Houses of

Parliament..

Mr. Speaker the following narrative is contained in the

United Nations documentation on CEDAW:

“The Convention (which) was adopted in 1979 by the

UN General Assembly, is often described as an

international bill of rights for women.

The Convention defines discrimination against women

as "...any distinction, exclusion or restriction made on

the basis of sex which has the effect or purpose of

impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or

exercise by women, irrespective of their marital

65 of 105

status, on a basis of equality of men and women, of

human rights and fundamental freedoms in the

political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other

field."

By accepting the Convention, States commit

themselves to undertake a series of measures to end

discrimination against women in all forms, including:

to incorporate the principle of equality of men and

women in their legal system, abolish all

discriminatory laws and adopt appropriate ones

prohibiting discrimination against women;

It affirms women's rights to acquire, change or retain

their nationality and the nationality of their children.

66 of 105

As noted Mr Speaker, The Bahamas reserved its

position under the constitution as it related to the

discrimination against women as it related to

citizenship: a discrimination based on sex..

Later in 2000 at the Millennium Summit, described as

the largest gathering of world leaders in history which

included The Bahamas, state leaders adopted the UN

Millennium Declaration, which committed their nations

to a series of time-bound targets, with a deadline of

2015, that have become known as the Millennium

Development Goals. There were 8 goals agreed upon

which included a commitment to

1 eradicate extreme poverty,

2 Achieve universal primary education,

3 Promote gender equality and empower women

67 of 105

4 Reduce child mortality

Improve maternal health

6 Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases

7 Ensure environmental sustainability

8 Develop a global partnership for development

Of the 8 critical goals of global pursuit which included

eradicating poverty and disease was the goal of

achieving gender equality and the empowerment of

women. The Bahamas committed to these principles

Mr. Speaker, a nation’s constitution or more

specifically our constitution is the body of collective

ideals and principles which seek to shape the forward

movement and advancement of our people in the

promotion of harmony and love. It provides the

68 of 105

foundation for the construction of an orderly,

transparent and just society.

The Preamble sets the tone for the objectives of our

constitutional provisions stating that “we” the

inheritors of and successors to this Family of Islands

DO HEREBY PROCLAIM IN SOLEMN PRAISE the

Establishment of a Free and Democratic Sovereign

Nation founded on Spiritual Values and in which no

Man, Woman or Child shall ever be Slave or

Bondsman to anyone or their Labour exploited or their

Lives frustrated by deprivation, AND DO HEREBY

PROVIDE by these Articles for the indivisible Unity

and Creation under God of the Commonwealth of The

Bahamas.”

69 of 105

Our Constitution speaks of “WE” the inheritors and

successors – not simply of the men in our country or

the Politicians or the wealthy or the business persons

or the professionals or the Priests and reverends but

“we” the collective body of persons, all citizens of our

beloved Bahamas,

with all of our diversity and differences and individual

uniqueness committing to a common and singular

vision of our country.

The “we” spoken of so proudly and so wrought with

emotion by Arianna in her individual performance

‘We’ having equal rights and equal protections under

the constitution no matter our standing or bearing in

this country:

the Prime Minister and the farmer are equally

endowed under the constitution as it relates to the

70 of 105

provisions and especially as it relates to the

fundamental provisions of the constitution.

The Constitution covers and protects me and it covers

and protects the people of Englerston,

the people of Abaco and Long Cay,

the people of Mayaguana and Grand Bahama,

and Eleuthera,

and Andros,

and Bimini

and throughout our archipelago:

Our Constitution protects and accords rights to all of

our citizens be they black or white, rich or poor, adult

or child.

Our Constitution is the Great Equilizer which

empowers and protects each of us, every citizen of

71 of 105

our country, every Bahamian, and governs the affairs

of state for us all.

Mr. Speaker, this is what we speak of when we speak

of “citizenship.” It is that of a SHARED STATUS

granted to members of a distinct community with full

rights, each member or citizen being equal in rights,

privileges, responsibilities and obligations.

The underlying philosophical concept is that of

equality and that distinct community that we speak of

today is The Bahamas and the citizens that we speak

of are Bahamian men, women and children.

In this way we are all interrelated because we come

from that one family of citizens called “Bahamians”

and we are thereby distinguished from citizens of

72 of 105

other countries and other sovereign states. It is why,

for example, the shining achievements of our Rhodes

scholars or of our men’s 4x 400 metre relay team or

the historic ground broke by Arianna or the sacrifice

of the brave men on the RBDF HMBS Flamingo

touches us so deeply, in our bellies to our souls.

Therefore, Mr Speaker, although our Constitution was

founded absolutely upon the ‘we’ , on principles of

freedom and equality the fact that there are

provisions which in some fundamental respects do

not speak in equal fashion to the women and men of

our country, that do not offer the same protections

and privileges, we must give pause as we do today.

One-half of our citizenry is comprised of women;

women who are full members of a democratic society,

73 of 105

who vote , who work, who pay taxes, who raise

children, who sit in government, who teach our

children etc .

Today our national constitution, the fundamental law

which governs our society and our family of citizenry,

does not accord the same rights and privileges to

women citizens that are accorded to men citizens as it

relates to the transmission of Bahamian citizenship

(i.e. membership to this family of citizens) to the

children of married women, Bahamian born, where

that child is born outside of The Bahamas and to the

spouses of women citizens while these rights are

accorded to Bahamian men under our constitution.

Today while women are equal in obligations and

responsibilities as citizens under our constitution and

74 of 105

indeed in all laws which govern our sovereign state

,we are not equal in all rights afforded under our

Constitution.

Mr. Speaker there is a direct link between rights and

equality. If we are not accorded equal rights under our

law and no less under the Supreme Law of our

country then there is no equality between men and

women, between me as a woman and citizen of this

country and you as a man and citizen of this country,

Mr. Speaker.

In 2014 this state of affairs , that is , the unequal

treatment of men and women in such a fundamental

matter as the transmission of citizenship to our

children and to our spouses, in the bolstering of

75 of 105

stability of family, where Bahamian men are accorded

rights and privileges that are not accorded to

Bahamian women and indeed any law or policy which

discriminates against women for the reason only that

she is a woman is today an egregious anomaly and is

inconsistent with the principles of equality of rights

between citizens.

The amendments proposed go even further to allow

for men to pass citizenship on to their children born

out of wedlock thus removing the final barrier under

the law to children born out of wedlock.

But Mr. Speaker, in the course of this debate I think it

very important that we put in context the provisions

related to citizenship in our Constitution so that we

76 of 105

understand the underlying rationale which accounts

for this difference in treatment by the framers, many

of whom comprised the freedom fighters in our

country and to whom we owe much as a people. I do

not think it would be correct to use a broad and

condemnatory brush relative to the provisions which

accorded unequal treatment between men and women

in our constitution in 1973 as we will see it was based

upon the rationale of the long-established and almost

globally accepted interpretation of the law.

Mr Speaker, in 1972, the framers of our Constitution

heralded the freedom of all of our people, proclaimed

that we would never again be in bondage and like

many other Constitutions at the time especially

throughout the world in Commonwealth countries,

77 of 105

“citizenship” was defined in consonance with the

ancient and firmly established legal principle of

“domicile” of origin in common law.

In the English case of Udny vs Udny in 1869 it was

established in common law precedent that:

“It is a settled principle that no man shall be without a

domicile, and to secure this result the law attributes to

every individual as soon as he is born the domicile of

his father, if the child be legitimate, and the domicile

of the mother if illegitimate”.

The common law further defined that the domicile of a

married woman is the same and changes with every

change of the domicile of the husband.

78 of 105

The wife becomes the wife of a foreign husband in the

case where the husband is a foreigner in the country

in which the marriage is contracted: the wife marries

knowing her husband to be a foreigner domiciled and

contemplating settled and permanent residence

abroad. In other words Mr. Speaker, the law imputed

automatic rules of domicile

For example, Mr. Speaker, the law of domicile dictated

that a Bahamian woman married to a foreign man was

deemed to take on the domicile of her husband as it

was presumed she would follow him to his home and

not vice versa whereas a foreign woman married to a

Bahamian man would take the domicile of her

husband as it was again presumed that she would

follow him to his home but not vice versa.

79 of 105

Children born within marriage would therefore take

their father’s domicile and those born outside of

marriage would take their mother’s domicile.

This was the established law at that time upon which

an entire body of jurisprudence existed and the

precepts of citizenship were no doubt premised upon

that law and these principles could be found in

constitutions of new states throughout the planet.

Indeed so entrenched is this law that it has

transmuted from common law to conviction that this

is the correct order of things.

Included also in this was the concept of “illegitimacy’

or fillius nuliis – child of no man a concept only

recently removed from our jurisprudence except as it

relates to citizenship and domicile. Indeed Our

80 of 105

constitution today speaks to a child being born

:legitimately” although the law has for all intents and

purposes save for citizenship and domicile removed

that terminology from the description of any child.

But Mr. Speaker, much has changed since that time:

the status of women has become radically redefined

even in our own social setting:

Mr. Speaker just 51 years ago women were not

allowed to participate in the electoral process yet

today several of us sit in this Legislature as elected

Members of Parliament, or as appointed senators,

some sit in the Cabinet of our Commonwealth and

hold critical portfolios.

81 of 105

Indeed today a woman sits as Head of State.

Today a woman heads the Central Bank and leads the

country in developing our national monetary policy; a

woman heads our financial services sector the second

pillar of our economy; in our legal system a woman

serves as President of the Court of Appeal and so on

and so on. Indeed Mr. Speaker, statistics show that

more women head households in our country than

men. Indeed in the last General Elections women

formed a larger block of registered voters than men.

What we see today has been part of the revolution that

ensued in the aftermath of sovereignty and the

subsequent empowerment of women in our society

made sure by a new Bahamas.

82 of 105

Under the law throughout history and all over the

world and over the generations being female carried a

number of varied disadvantages in various areas of

life including employment opportunities, property

ownership, income and other disabilities .

In fact women were often grouped with others as

“persons with disabilities”.

It is reputed that ancient common law endorsed the

chastisement of one’s wife (now known as wife

beating or domestic violence) but with the caveat that

the instrument used to chastise her was no thicker

than the beater’s thumb.

83 of 105

Today domestic violence is a criminal offence and the

subject of specifically enacted legislation including

the Domestic Violence Act.

In the words of a Bahamian jurist in her writing The

Woman and the Law in The Bahamas “The law has

always treated women in a manner consistent with

their supposed inferiority” or perhaps put differently,

the supposed superiority of the male person.

As stated earlier, Mr Speaker, the perceived roles of

women have radically changed and the laws have

evolved over the years eradicating many of the

disabilities and inequities that previously existed. But

there still remains the prohibition against

discrimination in our constitution not including

84 of 105

discrimination based upon ‘sex’. We understand the

meaning of that when we track the journey of women

throughout even recent history to today and

inconsistencies in the ability to transmit citizenship to

our children and the barriers faced over the

generations: these are incongruities in our

Constitution which hinder principles based upon the

true equality between men and women.

Mr Speaker, I believe it is today universally accepted

that the legal rationale in 1973 where different and

inconsistent rights were accorded to men versus

women in important respects and which though at

that time was based on long and well-established

legal principles is no longer, however, able to be

sustained today in 2014.

85 of 105

We are not able today to properly rationalize

inconsistency in the accord of rights to male citizens

and female citizens in this shared space called “The

Bahamas”.

The whole concept of shared citizenry defeats and

overrides the concept of inequality.

The ancient legal concept of “illegitimacy” upon

which an entire body of law including laws of

inheritance was based now no longer exists in our law

since the recently enacted Inheritance Act and the

Status of Children Act, the effect of which is that all

children are now to be treated equally under the law

although exceptions were made for citizenship in the

entrenched provisions of the Constitution. As

86 of 105

previously mentioned it is intended should the people

vote ‘yes’ the Status of Children Act will be amended

to provide for proof of paternity of children born out of

wedlock to a Bahamian father and non Bahamian

father.

Mr Speaker, I spoke previously to the appointment of

the Constitutional Commission to the process of

consultation and open dialogue of and by and with the

Commission and I wish now to refer to some of the

recommendations and observations relevant to this

debate and emanating from that process

The Report states that the Commission is

“unequivocal in its view that there ought to be no

difference in the ability of Bahamian men and women

to transmit their citizenship to their children and

spouses. The Report further observes that “to provide

87 of 105

for different treatment on the basis of gender is

tantamount to saying that there are classes or

degrees of citizenship and that the citizenship of a

woman is somehow less than that of a man”.

The Commission recommended that “all of the

provisions relating to the acquisition of citizenship

and transmission to children and spouses be cast in

gender neutral language to provide for the equal

attribution of the right of citizenship and to remove

any discrimination against women in this and indeed

in every other regard. This is being done with the goal

of putting Bahamian men and women on an equal

footing with respect to the acquisition and

transmission of nationality. Bahamian men and

women should have equal ability to transmit

88 of 105

citizenship to their foreign spouses except under the

provisions laid out in the new proposed Article 10

Of this recommendation and the Bills now before the

House is that the Constitution will be amended to

allow for a Bahamian born

Effects – Of this recommendation and the Bills now

before the House is that the Constitution will be

amended to allow for a child born to a Bahamian born

born married woman overseas to a foreign man will

have an automatic entitlement to citizenship and the

foreign spouse of a Bahamian woman will have an

entitlement to citizenship subject to the strict scrutiny

provisions.

The Commission also made recommendations

relating to children born in The Bahamas where either

89 of 105

parent is a Bahamian; the removal of any disabilities

in the ability of a single or unmarried Bahamian man

or woman to transmit citizenship to their children.

The concept of “filius nullius,” the child of no man

which was abolished in the Status of Children Act but

preserved in the Constitution as it relates to a child

born to an unwed father is proposed to be removed

from the Constitution to remove any difference in

treatment of a child attributable to the marital status of

the parent.

Further the Commission recommended the inclusion

of the word “sex” as a ground of discrimination in

Article 26 although making it plain that this provision

would continue to preclude same sex marriages.

90 of 105

Thus Mr Speaker the Commission identified as the

two matters of highest priority for constitutional

reform being

1) the amendment of the citizenship provisions to

achieve gender neutrality and full equality and

therefore putting men and women on the same footing

with respect to the acquisition or transmission of their

nationality and

2) the expansion of the definition of “discrimination”

in Article 26 to include “sex” as a prohibited ground.

There is a concentration on a singular concept and

primary principle of equality between men and women

and the removal of any discrimination against a child

91 of 105

based upon the marriage or other circumstances of

his parents in the provisions of the Constitution.

And while Mr Speaker should these Bills successfully

pass both Houses of Parliament and a majority vote of

the electorate this will have the effect of

immediately removing a fundamental structural

inequity, however, this does not mean that we still do

not have much work to do in our social setting to

eradicate cultural bias which cannot simply be

removed by a referendum process but will require

changes in our attitudes towards each other which is

a more difficult and complex process.

But this is an important start to a more fair, more just

human society.

92 of 105

We are therefore today debating those recommended

amendments to our constitution which are embodied

in the Bills before this House and which are based

upon the principles of equality between men and

women and which bestow on children the right to

attain Bahamian citizenship in two instances: the first

is where she is born outside of The Bahamas to her

Bahamian born mother and her non Bahamian father

whether in or out of marriage. The amendment will

give that child automatic Bahamian citizenship

transmitted from her Bahamian mother and in the

second instance where the child is born to a

Bahamian father out of wedlock whether in The

Bahamas or outside of The Bahamas that child will

automatically take his father’s Bahamian nationality

93 of 105

subject to the paternity of that child being legally

established.

And finally granting the right of citizenship to the

spouses of both Bahamian men and women subject to

the restrictions or scrutiny as aforesaid.

And finally the Bill prohibiting discrimination against

any person based upon their sex but subject to the

exceptions already set out and subject to existing

laws such as the Matrimonial Causes Act which

defines that marriage is between a man and a woman.

Interestingly, Mr Speaker, the Commission noted that

in all of its travels, interactions and discourse no

person advocated for same sex marriage.

94 of 105

It is within this context that the 5 bills now before this

Honourable House have been brought

The change in law will not be retroactive and thus will

only apply to births and marriages after the coming

into force of the change.

The Government has, however, publicly committed,

as a matter of policy, to grant citizenship to persons in

this category who were born before, subject to the

usual restrictions concerning national security, as the

pre-existing rights to apply for citizenship under

Article 8 are saved.

1.

2. Mr. Speaker, the late Frantz Fanon in his book “The

Wretched of the Earth” observed that “Independence has

brought moral compensation to colonized people and

95 of 105

established their dignity. But they have not yet had time to

elaborate a society, or to build up or affirm value.

3. “Nation-building is a steady, circumspect, considered and

purposeful enterprise. Our history cannot be ignored in

the middle of it. We do not lightly touch, however, our

national constitution nor indeed its entrenched provisions

but this is part of our elaboration of a society and the

building and affirming of the human value of Bahamian

men and women and children particularly in light of our

painful history

As noted by Michael D. A. Freeman in his paper Legal

Ideologies, patriarchal precedents and domestic

violence: “The law plays a primary and significant role

in producing social order. The power of law is a

symbol. This power is based in an ideology of the law

96 of 105

and an ideology of women supported by the law”. The

power of the law as a symbol must promote equity,

equality and farness, recognizing the wholeness of

each human being.

In the words of T. Marshall “If a law is to be effective

in its function and ideology, it must appear to be just”

Mr. Speaker, the amendment of the Constitution is a

sacrosanct act: not to be lightly or frivolously taken.

Our journey here today is the culmination of a

prolonged and public exercise undertaken by the

Constitution Commission.

I believe it very important that having regard to the

history of our electoral process that we must accord

to the Bahamian electorate an undoubted level of

97 of 105

sound judgment and common sense. This is the

premise of our Constitution which mandates the

decision-making from the Parliament to the people.

There have been a number of newspaper reports and

editorial commentary chastising the Government for

the length of time it has taken in the execution of this

process:

However, as we get closer we note the call lessens as

we become less verbal and more contemplative.

Mr Speaker, the Constitution of The Bahamas belongs

to the Bahamian people, not to any political

organization who may hold the reign of power for the

time being, or any Party in Opposition for the time

being nor the handful of Members who sit both in this

98 of 105

House and that other place nor to any singular

opinionated individual or groups of individuals. It is

not a political football but a sober and considered and

careful undertaking.

The Constitution is that document which enshrines

our fundamental values which play out in the

everyday lives of all of our people and facilitates our

existence as citizens.

It in many ways shapes and forms our cultural

identity: it provides for our institutional structures of

government and protects the rights of the individual

against all manner of things including against the

arbitrary exercise of state powers : these protections

99 of 105

and rights are described as the fundamental rights

and freedoms.

Our constitution is a sacred document. And it is very

important that nothing is done to trivialize or ‘dumb

down” its import nor the critical nature of the exercise

in seeking to alter its provisions.

I have read comments attributed to respected

individuals in our country which suggest non

participation in this fundamental exercise because of

the state response to the outcome of the vote on

legalizing gambling.

Mr Speaker, I wish to reiterate in the strongest way

that the referendum on gambling is not in the same

class of this of which we speak.

100 of 105

This process is mandated by our constitution and the

outcome is a legally binding result.

It would in my humble but strongly held view be

counter- productive and especially harmful if leaders

in our country make any connection of this process to

any other activity as it is an entirely distinct, unique

process and that such comments will lead to the non

participation of citizens in the shaping of their

Constitution. In the muting of voices in this shared

exercise.

Mr Speaker, should these bills pass in both houses of

Parliament with the three quarters vote as mandated

101 of 105

by Article 54, a national referendum will be held with 4

questions placed upon the ballot namely

1)Question” Approval of alteration to Articles 8 and 9

of the Constitution

Do you approve of this Bill, The Bahamas Constitution

(Amendment) Bill, 2014 which seeks to –

(a) Alter Article 8 of the Constitution to enable a

child born outside The Bahamas to a Bahamian

mother who was born in The Bahamas

automatically become a citizen of The Bahamas at

birth just as a child would be if born outside of

The Bahamas to a Bahamian father; and

(b) Repeal Article 9 consequentially

102 of 105

2) Question Approval of alteration to Article 10 of the

Constitution

Do you approve of this Bill, The Bahamas Constitution

(Amendment) (No 2) Bill, 2014 which seeks to alter

Article 10 of the Constitution to enable the foreign

husband of a Bahamian woman to have the same

constitutional right to obtain citizenship as a foreign

wife of a Bahamian male but subject to ensuring that

the marriage in question is not a marriage of

convenience or that the foreign person in question

has never been convicted in any country of an

indictable offence involving moral turpitude

3)Question Approval of alteration to Article 14 of the

Constitution

103 of 105

Do you approve of this Bill, The Bahamas Constitution

(Amendment) No. 3) Bill 2014, which seeks to alter

Article 14 of the Constitution to enable the Bahamian

father of a child born outside of a marriage to pass his

citizenship to that child just as an unmarried

Bahamian woman can presently do but subject to

proof of paternity

4) Question Approval of Article 26 of the Constitution

Do you approve of this Bill, The Bahamas Constitution

(Amendment) (No. 4) Bill 2014 which seeks to alter

paragraphs (3) and (5) of Article 26 of the Constitution

by inserting the word “sex” in the definition of the

expression “discriminatory” so as to make

unconstitutional to discriminate on the basis of sex

104 of 105

but subject to existing exceptions mentioned in

paragraph (4) of Article 26?

Mr. Speaker once these Bills have been successfully

passed by Parliament a series of educational

meetings for a and meetings and media aides to

provide information as to the meaning of these Bills

will be embarked upon to ensure that Bahamians have

a full and complete understanding of the meanings

and implications of the proposed alterations to the

Constitution

As pointed out in the PM’s Communication the

Amendments help to remediate the problem of

structural inequality and discrimination

105 of 105

Mr. Speaker, I move for the second reading of these

Bills in this Parliament: I have sought to explain as

best I can the meaning and effect .

We will rely soon on the collective wisdom of our

Bahamian people. It is my hope and prayer that they

will accept the basic and fundamental principle of

equality between Bahamian men and women and for

their children.

I end as I began in the laying of these Bills in reciting

a poem by Marion Bethel in tribute to Dame Doris

Johnson who half a century attempted to make her

case at that bar in this House which then only

comprised the membership of men for the right of

women to vote

*