MR. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, I bring you greetings from the friendly people of Anguilla. My people appreciated the interaction which they had with the committee during the 2003 decolonization seminar which was held in my island, Anguilla, and we look forward to continued interaction between the people of Anguilla and the committee.

 

Some 38 years ago, an Anguillian stalwart , Mr. Jeremiah Gumbs, who was termed “Anguilla’s roving ambassador”, during the crisis of  the  Anguilla Rebellion against an oppressive St.Kitts regime in 1967, and the subsequent invasion by British armed forces in 1969, at a teach–in in Jamaica, he said                                “ Anguillians are the most peaceful and law-abiding people anywhere. Now I am here to ask you as an Anguillian to get together with us to see that this place is not destroyed….Anguilla can be a model of democracy that can lead the world back to sanity. It is a small place and we can preserve it now in its natural state.”

 

Today, I am making that same appeal to the United Nations and to people of good will everywhere.

 

In 1967, the island of Anguilla for all practical purposes, was a colony of a colony, another island St.Kitts which was 70 miles away, and in colonies then as now , the interests of the people of the particular colony called Anguilla were subordinate to the interest of St.Kitts.

 

The root of the problem was that Anguillians wanted our own local government system, and not to be ruled from St.Kitts, and hence we had the Anguilla revolution of 30^th May 1967. Anguilla declared itself a Free Republic, and between 1967 and 1969, Anguilla was perhaps the most democratic country in the world. The people voted in a national referendum 1813 to 5, for succession from St. Kitts.

 

After the 1969 invasion by British armed forces, Britain, our administering power, promised the people of Anguilla democracy and development.  In 1976, an Anguillian lawyer, now Dame Bernice Lake Q.C, drafted a constitution for Anguilla, which was approved and implemented by the British government as the Anguilla constitutional Order 1976.

 

Since 1976 however, the Anguilla constitution was amended on several occasions and on each occasion the powers given to the elected representatives and the people of Anguilla under the 1976 constitution have been steadily whittled away and at present, in addition to a series of laws passed between 2000-2005, all power and authority in Anguilla, vests in the Governor. The office of Governor in Anguilla is in fact a constitutional dictatorship: the fact that a particular governor may be a very “nice” person and may or may not use his dictatorial powers is irrelevant in the context of self-determination.

 

In 1967, Anguilla was a state in association with Britain. Under the 1976 Constitution Order, Anguilla was a State in Association with Britain. However, without consultation with the people of Anguilla, under a constitution dated April 1^st 1982, Anguilla was returned to crown colony status.

                                                                                                                                 1.

Our function now is to chart the way forward for the people of Anguilla. I wish to state here that Anguillans are a separate and distinct people, and we have no desire to be re-colonized, subjugated, assimilated or exterminated as a people.

 

Mr. Chairman, we the people of Anguilla believe that it is the right of every colonial people to enjoy progressive constitution advancement to deliver the maximum possible level of self-government and to achieve a modern, non-colonial status. Anguilla is not an exception.

 

There are constitutional advancement initiatives taking place in the overseas Territories, and indeed the overseas Territories White Paper of 1999 seems to encourage this.

 

We believe the powers of Her Majesty’s Government should be reflected in the Constitution in terms that are not colonial in nature and which reflect the purposes for which they must rightly exist.

 

We share the views of Her Majesty’s Government in the UK, that it has a right to expect high standards of probity and governance in the Overseas Territories.

 

We regard our standards of probity and governance to be at least as high as those in the UK. This is not because the UK expects or demands it, but because the people of Anguilla, deserve a democratic and not an autocratic form of Government.

 

In nurturing a fledgling democracy such as ours, the people in exercise of their democratic rights, are the most appropriate arbiters of standards of Government.  The people of Anguilla are no less able to do so, than their counterparts in the UK.

 

We also share the views of HMG in the UK that it is important to ensure the independence of the civil service, the judiciary and the police, in the very same measure and manner, as it is important to do so in the UK itself and in all democratic countries. And so in the non-colonial climate that we would wish to exist, these institutions in Anguilla should be appropriately independent of everyone, including ht UK Government and the Governor, and not just independent of the democratically elected local Government.

 

The point that we are making, MR. Chairman is that the vitally important task of ensuring the independence of these bodies does not require colonial mechanisms, because the same vitally important independence is achieved elsewhere(for example, in the UK itself) by democratic means that are not colonial in nature.

 

The independence of these institutions can be achieved by colonial or by                     non-colonial means. We favour non-colonial mechanism for these important purposes in Anguilla as well.

 

 

                                                                                                                             2.

 

The UK also emphasizes its responsibility to ensure that Overseas Territories comply with international obligations.

 

We acknowledge this, but the issue is not that simple.  Often, these obligations are not in the interest of the Territory and place unaffordable financial strain on it or place huge constraints on its economic and social development. Sometimes the international measure serves the UK’s own domestic policy interest at the expense of the interest of the Overseas Territories.

 

We believe that it is morally wrong to impose these measures on the Overseas Territories and very probably legally indefensible, given among other things the nature of the UK’s obligations to the Territories.

 

It was with nothing less than horror that we read in the various publications that the foreign office wanted what would amount in effect to reciprocity for over three hundred million Europeans, with freedom of movement to our microscopic island of only 35sq. miles and 8000 Anguillians.

 

We are very conscious of what has happened to the native people of our neighbouring  Island of French St.Martin.  If the depopulation of these small black colonies in the Caribbean were an intentional ploy, by covert means such as racial discrimination and marginalization of us in our native island, so that it is “better” for us to go off to the ghettoes of Europe or live on the Dole in England, that would be a crime against humanity, but of course no one, including the native people of French St.Martin  realized what   would be the consequence of integration for a small native population when the tide of migration turns and they are over run with all the negative aspects of that tragedy, including institutional racism against the ethnic people.

 

We have witnessed the consequences, which can be genocidal in effect. There is an old saying, “when your neighbour’s house is on fire, wet yours”. There is another old saying, “the road to hell is paved with good intentions”.  The statement that “The Overseas Territories will reflect the best of what is British”, the imposition of British Citizenship on a colonial people in the shadowy world of globalization, and the concept of “Good Governance” which seems to translate into “do as I say or I will do it for you”, paints a frightening picture for people whose forefathers knew the pains of capture, deportation and slavery.

 

Recently in Anguilla we have notice what may be regarded as attempts to mesaginate our population, by violating the provisions of the constitution which requires 15 years residence for belonger status and the granting of belonger status to  a large number of Europeans and others, some of whom reportedly have been in Anguilla for as little as 2-5years.

 

Recently also, laws which contravene most democratic principles, including principles of freedom, fairness and justice and the right to just and prompt compensation for our land have made their way into our law books under the guise of “consolidation”.

                                                                                                                        3.

It would not be “nice” Mr. Chairman, for our administering power, the British Government, to be playing “colonial games” with the people of Anguilla, while they expound the principles of freedom and democracy elsewhere.

 

In closing I endorse whole-heartedly the concept that Anguilla, is being integrated into Europe by stealth, and I submit that we are in a special danger because of our proximity to French St.Martin, which is only 7 miles away from Anguilla, and where there is great daily interaction between the people of French St.Martin (which is an integral part of France) and the people of Anguilla.

 

A few weeks ago, it was said that Anguillians could not travel to French St.Martin unless they hold an European passport. The outcry over this has since abated, because after discussion between the British Governor for Anguilla and the French Superfect for St. Martin, we are told that we can continue to use the “Anguilla passport”, which is the British Overseas Passport.

 

Most Anguillians believe that this is a momentary stealth move, and that the intention is to eventually “force” Anguillians by one means or another to acquire the European passport and then once a majority of Anguillians have the European passport, the British will use this to say that the people of Anguilla have agreed to integration with Britain and with Europe.               

 

During the 2003 decolonization seminar in Anguilla, the then leader of the opposition  Mr. Hubert Hughes sent out an SOS to the United Nations decolonization committee. As a concerned Anguillian, I now join him in sending out an SOS to the United Nations Decolonization Committee and to all people of goodwill.

 

Many of the people of Anguilla believe that the Foreign and Commonwealth office already has a special constitution prepared for Anguilla. I hope not. The constitutional process in Anguilla has stalled; we are hoping to go forward very soon with renewed vigour.

 

We the people of Anguilla call upon the United Nations to assist us and to give voice to our view that constitutional provisions should no longer be imposed upon the people of the non-self-governing territories.

 

Mr. Chairman, I thank you.

               Lolita Davis-Richardson

               Representative of Civil Society/ Constitutional Committee

                                     (ANGUILLA)