Tyranny of majority

Indeed, if this constitution were to be adopted it would be our third since our political independence. However, a third draft constitution is a clear indication if not a conclusive presumption that the 1962 Independence Constitution was and the 1976 Republican Constitution is inappropriate or irrelevant to our society.

When Trinidad and Tobago was about to attain its independence in 1962 the Government of the day presented a draft constitution to the people but the Opposition had bitterly opposed several aspects of it as being unsuited to the indigenous structure of our society but the Government disregarded those concerns and foisted on the people a Constitution of the Westminister model which was alien to us.

What the Government had failed to comprehend was that the British Constitution was unwritten and founded on tradition and a body of conventions in which the British people had been nurtured and developed over centuries and which was and is peculiar to them but foreign to us. It was therefore not surprising that 16 years later the Government appointed the Wooding Commission to make recommendations for constitutional reform.

The Wooding Commission in its Report of January 22, 1974 pointed out that: “Race is perhaps one of the most significant determinants of political behaviour in Trinidad and Tobago...[A]11 the evidence indicates that the pattern of voting tends basically though not invariably to follow the racial, with those of African descent supporting the (PNM) and those of Indian descent supporting the (DLP).” However, 44 years after independence the finding of that Commission on the polarisation of racial voting has continued and will clearly be with us for some time.

It is therefore interesting to note that among some of the recommendations made by the Commission were: the abolition of the monarchical system of Government and its replacement by a Republic; the removal of the voting machines and the reintroduction of the ballot box; and the introduction of a mixed electoral system based on first-past-the-post and proportional representation.

However, while the then government accepted the commission’s recommendations for a republic and the abolition of the voting machine it rejected the recommendation for a mixed electoral system of voting.

The rationale for proposing proportional representation was clearly intended to dissipate racial polorisation in voting and to also introduce a fair and equitable system of representation while at the same time removing the pernicious aspect of democracy in which the winner takes all and the perpetration of tyranny of the majority over the minority. Turning now to the Draft Constitution it would appear this model has little relevance to us because it has failed to take into consideration some of the perennial and fundamental indigenous problems confronting our society since the dawn of our independence.

What is not clear about the Draft is the rationale or basis for seeking to replace the current constitution by one that provides for an Executive President. It would therefore, be morally wrong and politically unwise for a government to foist on the people another Constitution under the guise and pretence that it will provide for wider representation when it is clear that the party with the majority in the House of Representatives will elect a member of its party as president and consequently take full control of the executive.

Under the Westminister system the prime minister controls cabinet and cabinet controls the legislature. Under the proposed constitution while it may appear that there will be a complete separation of powers between the legislature and the president that may well be illusory since it will be one-party rule as usual unlike the US congress where the political culture and tradition is such that members of the Democratic and the Republican parties enjoy the freedom of joining together in a vote against a president on any issue.

The Draft Constitution therefore, appears to have little to commend it since it is simply a replication of an authoritarian system of government intended no doubt to perpetuate and perpetrate the tyranny of the majority over the minority which is basically and fundamentally inimical to the promotion of national unity and harmony among our multi-ethnic and multi cultural society.

KENNETH R LALLA

Port-of-Spain