The Editor, Sir:

The debate on dual citizenship continues where, oddly enough, under the present system many can be electors for Parliament but cannot themselves be elected due to their dual citizenship. This aberration adds to the call for a review of the Jamaica Constitution.

There are strong feelings about parliamentarians and others holding important offices having divided loyalties. It is felt that such offices demand total commitment to Jamaica, bearing loyalty to no other country, whether Commonwealth or otherwise. This view is further advanced by saying that it is immoral for persons who make laws for all of us to be able to take flight to another country and escape the consequences of their own laws.

Equally forceful and compelling is the argument that the rights of a citizen should not be restricted in that way.

Many persons with dual citizenship are making valuable contribution to Jamaica's development without placing the nation at risk in any way. They still regard themselves as loyal Jamaicans entitled to all the rights and privileges of their Jamaican citizenship. Their dual citizenship does not diminish their commitment to Jamaica. Once they are qualified to exercise the franchise at elections they should not be disqualified from any office in their country.

A convenience

A citizen of a Commonwealth country who has no ties to Jamaica other than 12 months' residence here may register to vote [section 37 (1) (b) the Constitution] and, as a result, is qualified to be elected to Parliament; and, foreseeably, be appointed prime minister. Against that background, it would be interesting to know what Commonwealth country (including the mother country) is now contributing more to Jamaica's development than the USA, a non-Commonwealth country. And would the contributions from all Commonwealth countries taken together, exceed the total contribution by the USA, Germany, France, and other non-Commonwealth countries? This oddity that allows Commonwealth qualification for election to Parliament and the disqualification of others with dual citizenship exists as a convenience without justification or conviction.

With the worrying abnormalities, should the net be cast wide enough to include an opportunity for absentee voting? All the well-reasoned arguments for both sides of the debate on dual citizenship may apply in some measure for Jamaicans living abroad to register and vote where they are. The present requirement is for a citizen of Jamaica resident in Jamaica at the time of registration [section 37 (1) (a) of the Constitution], which can and is, easily abused. But that is another matter for another debate.

Real problem

Jamaica is a small country in the global village where there is universal interdependence between countries. This country has problems that its citizens alone cannot solve. We have to face the realities of the times and be pragmatic about solving them. Time can be better spent than quarrelling about dual citizenship and green-card holders when we are desperately in need of help from whatever source, be it from persons with dual citizenship in our Parliament or otherwise.

After all is said and done, the real problem may be, not so much the disqualification of persons with dual citizenship for election to parliament, as the qualification for the selection of a prime minister as the head of the executive branch of government. Here, no person should be selected as prime minister unless he or she is a Jamaican citizen, born in Jamaica and holding no form of loyalty or obligation to any other state. This is what we should be looking at for an early and urgent declaration and to get on with the job of dealing with our critical and burning problems.

I am, etc.,

FRANK PHIPPS

phipps@infochan.com

Chairman

Farquharson Institute of Public Affairs