Contemplating the Constitution
THE EDITOR, Sir:
Just as I thought I understood the Constitution, THEY changed it.
Two thousand and eleven was a year I was at the age, and long past it, for enjoying the 'whereas' in the Constitution, as I understood them, but that was the year THEY interrupted my reverie and changed 'whereas'.
'Whereas' is now hidden in an arrangement for future generations, children and their education, the environment, my passport and my vote, and other accommodations as may be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society - interpret to taste. I am still entitled to my right to life, except when the State orders my execution. Although I am not to suffer torture or inhumane or degrading punishment, I am still subject to any description of punishment that was lawful in Jamaica before 2011 - the more things change, the more they remain the same: Welcome back, slavery! Notwithstanding, the status of my marriage is now secured - Bugger off, Adam and Steve, THEY say.
I silently allowed changes to the Constitution in the past, usually for unobtrusive issues such as Cabinet changes, age of retirement of judges, etc., but alarm bells sound when THEY increased their numbers by 44.4 per cent over their original amount, and I had nothing to do with it.
Now THEY wish to put 14 'baby-governments' out of my reach in the Constitution, without my saying. I am to be denied access to the last forum on the road to justice or put up with a change of terminus, without my consent to either. THEY are all-powerful, exercising absolute authority over the rest of us, all because THEY love us - as said by a father to his errant son while applying the strap.
It's been impossible to pin down THEY; they metamorphose every five years, only to change colour, not to advance the interests of those they love. Meanwhile, we suffer the pangs of despised love, waiting for a consummation of our rights from a full review of the Constitution, instead of the piece-by-piece changes.