The president’s Moral Authority Must Feature in the Upcoming Election Campaign.

September 28, 2009 · 8 comments

Guest  Article: Dr Irving  Eipigh Pascal

Listening to a re-broadcast of the address of the President of Dominica to the opening session of Parliament on Friday 31st July 2009, I was disappointed by His Excellency’s response to citizens’ requests for clarity and action to address the recent corruption allegations against the Government of the day.  My reaction was that something was missing, but willing to give him the benefit of the doubt I procured a copy of his speech and followed his advice therein to read his former speeches posted on his website, in the hope that I might have missed some redeeming words. None were present.  Rather, the President pointed to the supposed constitutional hand-tying that had severely limited the powers of our Head of State. .Notwithstanding he also reiterated his right to be consulted, to encourage, and even more importantly to warn.

My interpretation was that the President  was constitutionally unable to exercise the moral authority that much of the citizenry rightly or wrongly perceived to reside in our Head of State.  Thus, we remain ignorant of the President’s innermost thoughts on the allegations – and the public outcry for answers seems doomed to remain at stalemate.  Some might consider that this apparent reticence of the President to be proof of impartiality but to my mind, activist, elder African statesman and Nobel laureate, Archbishop Desmond Tutu best expresses my reaction; “to be impartial is indeed to have taken sides already…with the status quo”.

Intriguingly in his  opening address to the Sixth Parliament on Tuesday 29 June 2004, His Excellency, quoted constitutional scholar, Walter Bagehot on the rights of the constitutional monarch.  These rights, in increasing order of vigour, are namely (1) the right to be consulted (2) the right to encourage and (3) the right to warn – all of which the President avowed are at most anchored or at very least allowed in the constitution of the Commonwealth of Dominica.  Indeed, the vexing question which then agitated his mind was not the Presidential freedom to exercise these rights but the electorate’s responsibility to take action”.

The right to be consulted, or at least to be informed, is enshrined in our constitution.  The right to encourage can always be exercised, and so too can the right to warn.  But what if the warning is not heeded?  The preferred view is that ultimately the matter must rest with the electorate.  It is the people who possess the ultimate sanction.

To be fair, the more generous among us may argue that by returning to a subject he had addressed five years previously, the President, in his most recent address to the parliament was in some measure exercising one of the most powerful instruments available to him – that is, his moral authority and right to warn. But this remains opinion.

There clearly needs to be greater latitude for the President to exercise his moral authority under the constitution. This is a reasonable expectation  given the privileges enjoyed by the President under the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Dominica which among others, include protection from both arbitrary dismissal and  prosecution for actions while in office.

To his credit, our Head of State does give voice to the possibility of what may be increasingly presidential impotence in the face of burgeoning allegations of corruption in government. The President proposes various solutions. Perhaps we might choose to abolish outright the post of the President? Maybe we could merge it with that of Prime Minister? Alternatively, we might choose to increase the President’s power to intervene.

For example in his recent address, the President explains that

the power to appoint a Commission of Inquiry is one of those powers that have been removed from the discretion of the President. That power, though seemingly vested in the President, is not to be exercised at his discretion; but rather it is now to be exercised by him acting in accordance with the advice of the Cabinet or of a Minister acting under the general authority of the Cabinet.”

Why is it necessary to seek the advice of  a minister or the cabinet? Furthermore  which cabinet is really going to institute a commission of inquiry against itself or one of its prominent ministers? Wouldn’t it be more sensible for the President to use his discretion to exercise this power to appoint such a Commission if it concerns Members of Parliament?

I therefore would like to suggest that increasing the power of the President to fully exercise his moral authority, to warn and if necessary, to take action to protect the integrity of our democratic institutions and relieve the agitated minds of the citizenry , should form part of the upcoming election manifestos and campaign. I dare say this aspect of constitutional reform should fit quite well into the much touted UWP’s Clean and Green philosophy as well as the Labour Party’s “Transparency and Good governance” platform.

Moreover, in a hopeful vote of confidence in the President’s statesmanship I would like to solicit his support in bringing three other issues to the forefront of constitutional reform. First, the crossing of the floor by elected representatives without the endorsement of their constituents. Second, the President’s role in disputed election results that may require earlier rather than later resolution for example charges of fraud or a stalemate result. And lastly, the exercise of restraint in the psychological violence that we perpetrate against each other during the election campaign and then naively or worse hypocritically ask for unity and togetherness after the elections.

May the spirits of my ancestors be pleased.

Dr Irving  Eipigh Pascal

{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }

Mujahardin September 29, 2009 at 1:12 pm

Is that a diplomatic way of saying that the President is a bag of wind? When did anyone ever hear President Nicholas Liverpool warn PM Skerrit about any of his many corrupt activities? Is the President so blinded that he cannot see the rampant and bold face corruption that Dominicans experience from this gangster government on a daily basis? In the office of President, Nicholas Liverpool is clearly just a burden on the economy, especially in light of deteriorating economic conditions. He definitely has not added any value to the Office of President, in fact through him one can clearly see the uselessness of the Office of the President. Like the PM, I beleive that the President is in office to fatten his pocket at the expense of the poor tax payers of Dominica. If in essence that is what the article by the esteemed Doctor is saying, then I am in full support and agreement with Doctor Pascal.

Reply

Mujahardin September 29, 2009 at 5:45 pm

Mr. Nicholas Liverpool needs to go on a very, very long vacation and return to public office no more. I am wondering if it would be decent to say that he is certainly a disgrace to the Office of President. The President sits and draws a fat pay check every month while he turns a blind eye and a deaf ear to the destruction of our country by a band of incompetent gangsters whose only desire is to rip off the treasury of Dominica. Can anyone show me the value that Dr. Nicholas Liverpool has brought to the Office of The President in Dominica? If that is how a President behaves, then Cucum could be President. Please forgive me for calling it just as I see it. I don't patronize. I call a spade by its rightful name, and if the emperor has no clothes then who am I to say that he is not naked.

Reply

Mujahardin September 29, 2009 at 5:48 pm

Web Administrator, am I the only one upset about an over-qualified but incompetent President who gives the perception of endorsing corruption at every opportunity making excuses for his in-action? Web Administrator, I have very little regard for a President who has clearly put his personal self interest before the interest of the Country. I for one, I am fed up with this expensive and useless show called the Presidency which is at the expense of the poor tax payers of Dominica. WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COCOA.

Reply

A young person September 30, 2009 at 4:28 am

I am pleased with this article DR. PASCAL. Just as I thought all along the president in dominica I personally see no reason why we have that office, its more a waist of money that could be invested in some poor kids education. WE NEED REFORM!!!

Reply

jeremy October 1, 2009 at 9:06 am

I agree with everything stated, the President has limited power, he the right to be consulted, about what? to be told about yet more corruption I dont think so. he has the right to appoint a commission of enquiry, enquire about what? he wont create ANY ENQURY for he dare not bite the hands that feed him, as doctor Pascal quoted Desmond Tutu he has already taken sides.

He has the power to warn, warn who? our honourable President is totally impotent to exercise any right he may enjoy by the tenure of his high office, why? huge bonuses granted to his already highly inflated salary dictate to us all that where morals and money come together in the wrong hands morals go out of the window in every case.

The money he alledgedly earns that warrant such a bonus, raises a question what extra does he actually do to acheive such an increase, I am at a loss to answer that one.

I consider that the office of President is overpaid, underworked, and impotent, and therefore irrelevant, his salary and bonus structure alone would go a long way to provide school books for the needy kids, “very needy kids”.

And in conclusion it is a sad state of affairs to see such a high office strangled in such a way by the Skerrit administration to render it not just impotent, but the ridicule and scorn of Dominica in the eyes of the outside world.

Reply

deecee October 4, 2009 at 8:21 pm

we need a people's president , elected by the people, for the people, of the people, with the people and not this political party appointed presidency so change the constitution and let us move on.

Reply

Uncle Sam October 20, 2009 at 9:02 pm

I think Dr Pascal hit the nail strait on the head . The power of the president is worthless …so why is he being paid ?
I have always advocated for the ceasing of this fabulous pay for a man who does hardly anything for the state .

Reply

ruhtra October 25, 2009 at 6:53 pm

Why is it that everyone is on the President's back. Indeed, the presidency was there before all this charade. Someone had to hold the position. The constitution with many flaws needs to be changed as quickly as possible before the next election if possible.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: