Political tribalism?

03.AUG.07

Just over two weeks ago, the House of Assembly approved, unanimously, the Report of the Constitutional Review Commission (CRC) and re-committed itself to continuing the search for a new Constitution for St.Vincent and the Grenadines.

Another two weeks before that, the same House had approved the establishment of a CRC Steering Committee, a scaled-down version of the larger body, to continue to facilitate the process.{{more}}

One would draw the conclusion, quite logically, that Parliament was maintaining its consensus on this vital issue. This must have gladdened the hearts of all patriots for it is not very often that there is Parliamentary consensus on any matter at all. But perhaps those so encouraged are naive, for, right after this display of unanimity, the Opposition New Democratic Party (NDP) seems to be breaking ranks on the constitutional issue.

NDP President and Leader of the Opposition, Hon. Arnhim Eustace, has written to Prime Minister Hon. Dr. Ralph Gonsalves, indicating that the NDP will withdraw its support for the reform process unless four conditions are met. These conditionalities pertain to NDP concerns about election-related matters. None of these are new and, significantly, all were concerns expressed by the NDP before the Parliamentary debate and approval of the continuation of the reform process.

It must be deeply mystifying that the Parliamentary Opposition would therefore make such a sudden about-turn. They have been, from the outset, part and parcel of the process and mechanisms for constitutional reform. Not even the General Elections of 2005, with all its divisiveness and political contention, was able to disrupt this process nor cause any shift in the commitment of both parties. Up until now, the constitutional reform process has remained above the cut-and thrust of partisan politics. Why the shift now?

One is at a loss to answer this question since the provisos set out by the Opposition Leader have little bearing on the mechanisms for constitutional reform. In fact they perhaps underline the absolute urgency for it including electoral reform. The NDP is certainly entitled to voice its concerns about the electoral process and to seek to have these addressed just as the Government has a responsibility to take any legitimate concerns on board. But should participation in a much more all-encompassing matter be dependent on satisfying those concerns?

It is most regrettable that the Opposition has embarked on this course. That road can only result in dragging the making of a relevant constitution into the gutters of divisive and disruptive partisan politics, making it degenerate into a matter of party support. There is obvious grave danger in this course and even at this juncture we call for a serious re-think on this course of action.

We must also caution the government about how it responds to the NDP letter. Acting Prime Minister Sir Louis Straker for instance, must refrain from public statements such as describing those persons who may, for whatever reason, support the NDP’s position as “illiterates”. This can only inflame passions and harden positions.

The CRC has spent more than four years trying to fashion a process which would help us to avoid the path of political tribalism. We cannot afford to let our politicians take us down that road.