Further submission from Sonia P E Grant,
Bermuda
1. In what is my third submission to the
Foreign Affairs Committee, I wish to draw your attention to what
the American Bar Association ["ABA"] is doing with respect
to the Rule of Law. For well over the past decade plus, the ABA
has given considerable thought and deliberation to the concept
of the Rule of Law. [www.abanet.org]
2. At its mid-year meeting held during the
first week of February 2008 in Los Angeles, California, in the
United states of America, The president of the ABA, William Neukom
announced the development by the ABA of "The Rule of Law
Index For Justice".
3. President Neukom was very deliberate
in stating that the Rule of Law is not the Law of lawyers or judges
... but is JUSTICE.
4. The Rule of Law Index for Justice is
four-pronged.
5. In the first instance, there must be
a Government which is accountable under a set of laws.
6. Secondly, the Laws must be clear, coherent,
publicized, stable and fair by Universal standards.
7. Thirdly, the laws should be enacted,
administered and enforced in an open, efficient and fair process,
and the process should be accessible to all.
8. The process depends on a cohort of law
enforcement; advocates and judges who have to be ethical, competent,
and diverse, and independent of private influence.
9. Having established the Rule of Law Index
For Justice, the ABA will apply the said Rule of Law Index For
Justice in their own country the United States of America, and
Chile, India and Nigeria.
10. The objective of the ABA in looking
at its own government, and the governments of Chile, India and
Nigeria is not to shame and blame, but to create reliable and
accessible information.
11. When the Rule of Law Index for Justice
is transposed to the operation of the Corporation of Hamilton,
with respect to municipal elections, it could be argued that aspects
of the laws relating to municipal elections are not coherent.
Of late, by way of one example, there has been great concern about
the meaning of an "occupier". Now it is being mooted
that one has to be a "beneficial occupier". What is
a "beneficial occupier", a landlord is heard to say!
12. Furthermore, it could be said that the
laws relating to the Corporation of Hamilton are not fair because
they over seven hundred residents of the City of Hamilton are
not permitted to register or vote.
13. More importantly, under the third prong
of the Rule of Law Index for Justice, the law as it relates to
municipal elections and in particular, the election of 26 October
2006, cannot be said to have been administered and enforced in
an open, efficient and fair process, with the process being accessible
to all. Some nominees of Municipal electors did not know of the
change of nominee that would be permitted if the registered nominee
was abroad.
14. A Returning Officer, who usurps the
role of the Registering Officer by making pronouncements that
the Registering Officer will be changing the names of nominees
of Municipal electors, without the knowledge of the Registering
Officer is blatantly wrong, and diminishes the efficiency and
fairness of the process.
15. A Returning Officer, who on the eve
of a municipal election, tells the Registering officer, who has
not changed the names of any nominees, that if potential nominees
of municipal electors come to the polling station intending to
vote and he [the Returning Officer] deems that they should be
on the municipal register, and they are not, that he will give
them a ballot paper, annihilates the administration of the election
process in an open, efficient and fair process, and the rule of
law is thrown out the window.
16. The Returning Officer, who in the week
of a municipal election, tells even one potential [change of]
nominee of a Municipal Elector that if their name is not put on
the municipal register, and that if they come to the polling station
and their name is still not on the register, and it is deemed
by the Returning Officer that the missing name should be on the
municipal register, they will be given a ballot paper, annihilates
the openness, efficiency and fairness of the election process,
thereby resulting in the Rule of Law being thrown out the window.
17. The Registering Officer, who makes no
public announcement as to whether or not changes of the names
of nominees of municipal electors will be permitted, annihilates
the administration and enforcement of the municipal laws in an
open, efficient and fair process;
18. The Registering Officer, unable to make
a decision until the wee hours of election morning, as to whether
or not changes of the names of nominees of municipal electors
will be permitted, and without telling anyone except the person(s)
assisting her, again annihilates the administration and enforcement
of the municipal laws in an open, efficient and fair process,
and as a consequence the Rule of Law is tossed out of the window.
20 March 2008
| 
