Gov’t must pass general law before any PIR
(CNS): In Justice Tim Owen’s full ruling on the successful judicial review brought by Shirley Roulstone, a leading member of the Cruise Port Referendum (CPR) group, he outlined the necessity of a general framework law to be in place before any bespoke legislation can be brought setting a date and question for a people-initiated referendum (PIR). The judge said that without it, the constitutional right to this special vote would be undermined and result in exactly what happened in this case, an “unequal playing field… heavily stacked” in government’s favour.
In a stunning victory for the Roulstone, her legal team at Broadhust LLC and CPR — and another bad day for government — Owen’s judgment spells out some serious flaws in how government approached this vote. The ruling highlights just how much it was misleading and railroading the people into an extremely unfair situation.
Government conceded on almost all of the grounds that Roulstone had argued, leaving one key outstanding argument, namely that the Referendum Law was not compatible with the Constitution. If this had gone unchallenged, government would have held a vote that it knew was flawed and biased against its own people.
In his analysis of what the judge called a very novel case, he noted that the controversy and uncertainty “was a predictable consequence of the Legislature’s failure to make any form of legislative provision” for this constitutional right, which was clearly designed to increase checks and balances on government.
Owen said the reaction of the government to the successful petition “hardly inspired confidence in the fairness and transparency of the… process”.
The judge said the decision by government to make people sign a verification form and allow people to pull their names lacked any basis in law. He criticised the government’s hurried and unlawful approach to setting the question, the last minute changes and then giving opposition members only one hour to see the bill before it pushed the law through.
Justice Owen said another powerful reason for needing a framework law was the fact that with any subject that is at the level of national importance, government is going to be biased one way or another.
He said that “allowing the democratic representatives to change the ground rules every time there is a referendum risks the rules being changed to suit their policy choice… undermining the effectiveness of the people’s direct democratic right freely to question that policy choice via a fair and effective vote”.
Owen backed the position made by Roulstone’s legal team that the way government handled this vote, including how the question and date were set, the disenfranchisement of new voters, the absence of campaign finance or broadcasting rules, or any method to provide objective information to voters, “all combined to create an unequal playing field which was heavily stacked in favour of the government side to such an extent which endangered the right to a free and fair and effective vote”.
Following the historic victory, Kate McClymont from Broadhurst LLC, who was instructed by Roulstone, said this decision was “truly significant in that it will have an impact, not just on this referendum but on all referendums going forward”. She said the firm was very pleased with the result and grateful to have had the chance to represent Roulstone on such an important matter.
Broadhurst had acted for Roulstone on a reduced fee basis but the judge ordered government to pay all of those costs.
See the judge’s full and comprehensive ruling in the CNS Library
Check back shortly for CIG and CPR response to historic judgment.
- Fascinated
- Happy
- Sad
- Angry
- Bored
- Afraid
Category: development, Local News, Politics
DUMP????????????????????
no dictator’s….lodge lose again!!! lol🐏
We gah protest that too. We protest breeze Bobo! Referendi!
So many lies are being told, but some of us still cling to the truth.
Well done Kate so pleased for you professionally, this is a wonderful achievement.
Well done Kate, your star is rising in the east. Congratulations.
The Govt should resign. This is a damning judgment. The Govt sought to undermine the constitution and completely fail to represent the people it was meant to represent. For the good of the Cayman Islands, GO NOW.
8.18 To be replaced by who?
Therein lies the problem. No doubt Kenny would know how to get us off the EU blacklist, right?
Well, Tara and Alden got us on there so that doesn’t say much about them either..
Tara Rivers didn’t know how to keep Cayman off the list.
She has every qualification to be considered competent. “She had one job one job!” Yet look at the results.
Ever heard of “Educated beyond intelligence”.
Two important points that are being missed here. Firstly the law was passed UNANIMOUSLY in the house. Remember that?
Secondly if this stands – then a judge can quash ANY law democratically passed by our elected officials. Forget the port debate and think about that for a second. Let THAT sink in???
You are missing the point …. the court has determined that the Government has not acted in accordance with the Constitution. We should welcome this judgment – the Government can be held to account for its failure to abide by Cayman law.
You really are either either incredibly stupid]d, or deliberately missing the point. The judge found that the law was INCONSISTENT with the constitution, which MLAs are meant to protect. Laws passed by the MLAs have to be in compliance with the constitution to protect all of us. The judge cant suppress any law – just those which the MLAs – there for a 4 year term – decide are fine irrespective of the constitution. Saying that the MLAs can do whatever they want is a bit like ignoring the fire alarm in our house when it goes off.
7.47 The house also unanimously passed the law which allowed any government doctor guilty of serious errors involving death of a patient off the hook as neither they or their employer could be sued. Remember that?.
It’s your constitution, who will protect it?
For the avoidance of doubt, these are formal determinations that the government is acting unlawfully.
Let that sink in for a moment, and then explain to me how these characters deem themselves to be “forever honorable”.
exactly. Understand that we set out the constitution to be a standard to which our government must protect. We then need an independent judiciary to ensure that no abuses take place by that government. Checks and balances are why a free and democratic community survives and thrives instead of succumbing to a tyrant or ‘strong man’ that promises much but really only benefits those that suckle at his teat.
Fix the damn dump.
Before it fixes you
Vote No
Can’t we somehow punish Alden and Moses-A-Fretting by making them each pay $33,000 each towards the legal costs? Both of them need to feel some pain in their pocket, it is not right that government is paying $66,000 – and these two esteemed gentlemen just sit back and laugh – as they have absolutely no obligation to suffer from their incompetence and gross negligence of the constitution.
Whilst we may feel the governments bad faith over the port vote more directly, their complete incompetence over the EU blacklisting – avoidable by them enabling the legislation they had approved – will cost us the taxpayers way more than the costs order on this. Jeesum. Incompetent people, moving to a drum beat of other interests, incapable of dealing with the basics such as ensuring that the financial sector which generate 65% of our income can operate but obsessed with personal issues such as the port and Smiths Cove. Yet we continue to elect them. I guess that really raises the question of whether an electorate that stupid deserves any better.
Wait – Alden says he is going to appeal, and thereafter no doubt to the Privy council. Because a) its not him that’s paying, its us! and b) his masters have given him clear instructions. A neutral government, truly for the people, might reflect and say – hey, the court doesn’t think we are actually doing the best job of representing our taxpayers.
But these guys are not concerned with the taxpayer or the public – its about what vested interests want to happen. and since they are not paying the cost, no issues about appealing this all the way in the hope that the protesters would run out of money. If there was any fairness in this at all Roulstone would have all her legal costs funded by he taxpayer if Alden is getting all his funded. Or alternatively, Moses and Alden should fund the appeal!
Reference the 3rd paragraph above :
” If this had gone unchallenged, government would have held a vote that it knew was flawed and biased against its own people.”
So much for the C.I.G working for its own people , sad days .
Justice Owen’s comments speaks directly to the character and intent of Alden McLaughlin’s government.
Where is the Auditor General and Governor’s Office in these matters? This must trigger official investigations.
Vote out all the UNITY govt members in 2021 they are an embarrassment to democracy
yes and bring in Ezzard and Arden and…erm oh jesus
Vote them out NOW. 2020.
Respectable alternate candidates don’t want to run alongside or associate with these clowns. Voters need to change the eligibility criteria in the Constitution, and not one person has bothered to put that forward by way of petition to Governor’s office/FCO.
Uh-oh you may have exposed the deep dark secret that’s been many of the activist supporters’ secret dream all along hasn’t it? “Change the eligibility criteria in the Constitution.” So is that the plan then – will that be Shirley Hero’s next court case?
Resign now Alden your actions and that of your cabinet members concerning the port project is officially a disgrace!
Add that to the black listing – do us a favour and resign.
Mac is laughing as he sips his champagne. Almost time to put Plan B into action. You have been suckered Alden.
Mr. Premier, are you still re evaluating your position?
Sorry Alden, please be reminded that the Cayman Islands are not run by a dictatorship.
Long live democracy!!
Are you joking? Alden is a controlled puppet leading us all into slavery.
I would surmise that if Alden could go back in time about 10-12 years and retract his Lodge membership, he would.
His selling out of the Cayman Islands has come at great personal cost for sure.
I am not even sure if he sleeps at night any more.
He is in so deep now with the globalists, he would appear to have no point of return.
Fortunately, with God, there is always a point of return as long as you are in the land of the living.
Good luck, Sir.
True. Repentance is very freeing and revitalising when you turn from graft, coercion, and tribute, to doing what is that will enrich and benefit as many of your neighbours as your thralls.