The leader of the fledgling New National Party, Kemar Stuart, on Friday gave lawmakers his reservations about the draft legislation to overhaul the process by which people become Barbadian citizens, despite giving broad support. He warned that its wording grants a minister too much unchecked power.
Appearing before the Joint Select Committee on Governance and Policy Matters on the Immigration Bill and the Barbados Citizenship Bill, Stuart said that while the legislation was timely and necessary, it raised fears of future abuse or arbitrary action.
He argued that any decision regarding the granting or deprivation of citizenship must include a clear path for appeal.
“If I want to protest the minister’s decision, I should have somewhere to be able to protest that decision,” he said. “This bill, while it speaks to the granting of citizenship, also has expansive provisions on depriving people of citizenship. The minister has the utmost discretion, and you don’t necessarily require further parliamentary approval to make specific decisions. I’m concerned that at a future date, there may be the possibility of abuse.”
Stuart drew parallels with international examples, warning against any potential for discriminatory or politically motivated revocation of citizenship.
“In the Middle East, you have countries that take over other people’s land and render the natives stateless,” he said. “You should guard against the possibility of such an action. Even if you are a CARICOM or Commonwealth citizen, by virtue, there’s a possibility that your citizenship could be revoked under specified future laws.”
He also raised concern over Clause 9(1)(c), which gives the minister the power to revoke citizenship based on “speech or acts” deemed disloyal or disaffected towards Barbados.
“One person, meaning the minister, has the determination by somebody’s speech or act,” Stuart said. “To give the public some comfort, there should be specific wording… terms like ‘terrorist activities’, because this is broad. ‘Speech or act’ could mean anything. I would appreciate something more specific as to what exactly is disloyalty or disaffection towards Barbados.”
In response, committee chair Marsha Caddle MP clarified that the clause in question would not apply to citizens by birth.
“This does not apply to a person who is born in Barbados and becomes a citizen under the Constitution,” Caddle explained. “This relates to those granted citizenship under other conditions. I wouldn’t want the public to believe that any Barbadian born here could be stripped of citizenship for speech.”
But Stuart insisted that clearer language and stronger judicial oversight were still needed.
“You may grant somebody citizenship, but if the minister wakes up not feeling good or angry and determines that this person does not [deserve it]… again, it’s too broad,” he said. “Regardless of if it’s someone born here or granted special citizenship, it should be specified, acts like terrorism, human trafficking, treason, etc.”
Stuart also cautioned the government against lowering the bar for citizenship in its drive to boost population growth.
“I don’t think citizenship is something we should willingly gift,” he said. “I know we want to attract people, both working class and wealthy, but I wouldn’t drop the bar too low. Barbados’ passport is a very powerful one globally, and we should protect that status.”
(SB)
The post Fledgling NNP backs Citizenship Bill’s intent, warns against ministerial overreach appeared first on Barbados Today.
