Renaming the Trinity Cross

But the judge also rejected the joint application made by the Maha Sabha and Islamic Relief Centre on the basis that the TC was a national award by law and the law could not be set aside on the basis of an infringement of rights and freedoms. Only Parliament, therefore, can change the name of the Trinidad and Tobago’s highest national award.

However, given that Mr Manning is a politician, none of these factors would probably carry weight with him. His primary concern would be to preserve his core support and, if possible, extend it. In our political culture, this usually means not rocking the boat. Our politicians, whether in government or in the other estates, are not individuals who care to change the status quo, once that status quo allows them to retain whatever office they hold. So the very fact that the country has come this far with a Trinity Cross as our highest national award is, for many, sufficient reason to keep it that way.

But Mr Manning, who is the country’s longest-serving parliamentarian, must also realise that what made for effective politics when he started his career 35 years ago does not necessarily work now. The simple fact of ethnic demography demonstrates this. After all, the Maha Sabha would probably not have taken this issue to court save for the fact that Hindus now make up the second largest religious denomination in the country and Trinidadians of Indian descent form the largest racial group.

However, Mr Manning’s core political support is Christian — indeed, his self-description as a born-again Christian is at least partially intended to seal support among that constituency. However, while the Catholic Church and other major Christian denominations have no objection to the Trinity Cross being renamed, the Pentecostals are opposed to any such move. This consideration may weigh strongly with Mr Manning.

In our view, however, it should not weigh too heavily. With the Opposition in growing disarray, Mr Manning and the PNM regime have been given leeway that is worrying to many. But this leeway also means that Mr Manning can take action that might, in other circumstances, be politically costly. Renaming the Trinity Cross will not lose him support even amongst those who most strenuously oppose the move. At most, such persons would not come out to vote, but they are not likely to give their votes to the UNC.

On the plus side, Mr Manning will also gain political capital from this move. By instigating the name change, Mr Manning will dilute one rhetorical weapon from the UNC: their standard accusation of racism. After all, this is a measure which is directly aimed at acknowledging the Hindu and Muslim populace as citizens equal to the once-Christian hegemony exercised over the society. More importantly, however, Mr Manning will be demonstrating that he is putting the national interest first, making what is literally a symbolic gesture to reduce ethnic discord in the society.

Mr Manning may calculate these matters differently. But we hope not. The renaming of the Trinity Cross need not be a controversial matter, but it will surely remain so as long as the name stays. If it is changed, however, any controversy will quickly die away. If Mr Manning knows anything about how this society works, he should know this.