A constitution is more than a supreme statute—it is a manifesto of national identity and aspirations, a contract between the governing and the governed. The people have spoken, even more profoundly now, on the report of the Constitutional Reform Commission than in the town hall meetings that preceded it; it is up to the commission and our legislators to listen and act. There may yet be time to fashion a republic of the people, by the people, and for the people, inspired, exulted, free.
The latest forum exposed a troubling gap between the aspirations of our citizens and the proposals put forth by the Blackman Commission. While we acknowledge the commission’s efforts, the criticisms voiced by citizens at the Frank Collymore Hall consultation were an irresistible call to ‘wheel and come again’.
The characterisation of the reform report and its recommendations as “embarrassing” and “antiquated” by forthright citizens like Norma Springer underscores a fundamental issue: our fledgling republic risks adopting a constitution that fails to reflect the progressive, forward-thinking nation we aim to be. The glaring absence of innovative thinking and the lack of engagement with academia and youth voices in this process is particularly alarming and must be addressed.
Several critical issues have been conspicuously absent from the Blackman report, each demanding urgent consideration. The rejection of proposals for parliamentary term limits, despite significant public support, requires both explanation and reconsideration. In an era where end-of-life choices are increasingly recognized, the constitution’s silence on the right to die–and indeed a wide range of privacy issues such as women’s reproductive rights–is a glaring oversight. We were particularly distressed by the absence of formal processes for introducing citizen-inspired debate and legislation through petitions and the rejection of parliamentary recall. These omissions undermine our democratic engagement.
To truly embody the spirit of a republic– in Latin, ‘res publica’ or a ‘public affair’– it is time to move beyond the hierarchical, commission-based approach reminiscent of our colonial past. Instead, there should have been a more inclusive, participatory process: a reenactment of the constitution by the People through the establishment of a representative constitutional convention, comprising citizens from all walks of life and every parish, to draft and debate constitutional provisions. We must implement mechanisms for direct citizen input, such as online platforms and community forums, to gather ideas and feedback throughout the process.
Such a constitutional convention would harness the expertise of panels in various fields to provide informed perspectives on complex issues. A parallel youth parliament would ensure the voices of young Barbadians are heard and incorporated into the constitutional framework. On contentious or fundamental questions, internal debate and votes on clauses should be held to ensure broad public consensus, truly putting the power of constitutional reform in the hands of the people.
We urge the Constitutional Reform Commission to acknowledge the public’s criticisms and, at the very least, publish a minority report or an addendum before the full report is laid before Parliament. This addendum should comprehensively address the omissions highlighted by the public, including term limits and mechanisms for citizen petitions. It should provide a more innovative vision for Barbados’ constitutional future, incorporating the cutting-edge democratic practices the public has called for. The addendum is the very essence of the democratic process, outlining a more inclusive process for the final stages of constitution-making, that reflects a truly republican approach and responds to widespread concerns. Crucially, it should propose mechanisms for ongoing constitutional review and amendment to ensure our supreme law remains relevant and responsive to changing societal needs.
In our ongoing transition from a monarchy to a republic, our constitution should reflect not just a change in the head of state and other forms of political window dressing – just as the Independence constitution was presented in 1966 – but a fundamental shift in how we govern ourselves. It must be a living document that embodies the aspirations and values of all Barbadians, not just a chosen few. The public’s engagement and criticism demonstrate the deep interest Barbadians have in shaping their governance. This passion should be harnessed, not sidelined. The new constitution can still be a document that truly reflects the will of the people and sets a new standard for democratic governance in the Caribbean and the Commonwealth.
The post A new constitution demands deeper, more inclusive change appeared first on Barbados Today.
