By Zahra Burton and Catarina Demony
KINGSTON/LONDON (Reuters) – Many Jamaicans want their country to ditch King Charles as head of state but a bill presented by the government to do just that has frustrated some critics of the monarchy who believe the change should go further to slash colonial ties.
Jamaica gained independence in 1962 but – like 13 other former British colonies – it still retains the British monarch as its head of state.
Public opinion on the Caribbean island of nearly 3 million people has been shifting for years, and in December the government of Prime Minister Andrew Holness presented a bill to remove King Charles.
Hundreds of thousands of enslaved Africans were shipped to Jamaica during transatlantic slavery, and many scholars and advocates say the legacy of slavery and colonialism has resulted in or played a role in enduring inequities. Growing calls by African and Caribbean nations for reparations to address past wrongs have added to a shift in sentiment across the region.
Britain has so far rejected calls for reparations. On the issue of removing the monarchy as head of state, Buckingham Palace usually says such matters are for the local people and politicians to decide. On a visit to the Bahamas in 2022, Prince William – who is now heir to the throne – said he supports and respects any decision Caribbean nations make about their future.
The Jamaican bill – which could be debated in parliament as early as this month or next – would have to be ratified in a referendum if passed.
Before that, some critics – including the opposition People’s National Party (PNP) – are raising objections to how a future president would be selected, what his or her role would be, and which court should be Jamaica’s final court of appeal.
Steven Golding, head of the Universal Negro Improvement Association, founded more than a century ago by Jamaican civil rights leader Marcus Garvey, said the group and others had long advocated for the removal of “the last vestiges of the colonial umbilical cord”.
But he added: “We must make sure that it’s not a cosmetic surgery being done… we don’t want to swap having a British monarch… to having a titular president. I would like to see an executive president, directly elected by the people.”
Longstanding calls by some Jamaicans to abolish the monarchy picked up steam after Barbados, another former colony in the Caribbean, removed the late Queen Elizabeth as head of state in 2021. Holness told Prince William during a visit by the royal in 2022 that his country wanted to be “independent”.
A survey by pollster Don Anderson in 2022 showed 56% of people in Jamaica wanted the monarch removed, up from 40% a decade earlier.
A PRESIDENT AS HEAD OF STATE
According to the government’s bill, Charles’ representative in Jamaica – the governor general – would be replaced by a president nominated by the prime minister in consultation with the opposition leader.
If the two could not agree on a candidate, the opposition leader could recommend a name, and if that were not accepted, the prime minister could choose a nominee who would then be elected with a simple parliamentary majority.
Donna Scott-Mottley, a spokesperson on justice for the PNP, said removing Charles would be the “final birth of a true nation” but the way the president would be chosen under the bill “compromised everything”.
“If you (PM) wanted your right-hand man to become president, you simply do the nomination,” Scott-Mottley told Reuters.
Former Prime Minister P. J. Patterson has also voiced opposition, saying the president would be a “puppet of the prime minister”.
The government did not reply to a request for comment on the criticism.
‘FULL DECOLONISATION’
The bill is likely to pass the lower house of parliament as the governing Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) currently has the two-thirds majority required, but it will need at least one opposition vote when it moves to the upper house.
Even if rejected by the upper house, the bill can still be put to a national referendum, which the government hopes to hold by next year. To pass, the referendum would need two-thirds of the vote, rather than just a simple majority.
A general election due this year may delay the process.
Another point of contention is the London-based Privy Council, the final court of appeal for UK overseas territories and some Commonwealth nations. Critics say this should be replaced by the Trinidad-based Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ).
Accessing the Privy Council can be expensive and cumbersome as those who wish to argue their cases there need a visa to travel to Britain. Caribbean nations such as Barbados, Belize and Guyana have replaced the Privy Council with the CCJ.
The Jamaican government has said matters related to the court would feature later in the “phased reform”, and that Jamaicans would be able to weigh in on the matter.
Christopher Charles, professor of political and social psychology at the University of the West Indies, said keeping the Privy Council was like wanting to get divorced while keeping “a room in the matrimonial home”.
Scott-Mottley said it would be “anachronistic” to drop Charles as monarch but still use his court.
Constitutional change advocate Haile Mika’el Cujo said keeping the Privy Council could put people off from voting in the referendum: “People are not going to sign off on that.”
Disagreements over the Privy Council have led the PNP to pause its participation in the committee working on the bill.
“We believe that time has come for full decolonisation… not piecemeal or partial or phased,” said PNP’s leader Mark Golding.
(Reporting by Zahra Burton in Kingston and Catarina Demony in London; Editing by Frances Kerry)
Comments