Letter of the Day | Insufficient time for comment on Constitutional Amendment bill

THE EDITOR, Madam:

​A large and complicated document is available online - the recently tabled bill for constitutional amendment .

I would not have been aware that a public comment period was available if I had not seen an advertisement in The Sunday Gleaner dated January 26, 2025 stating that the period for comments on the proposed bill as “The Constitution (Amendments (Republic) Act, 2024” ends on the 29th. I subsequently made a call to the Parliament (Gordon House) regarding this short period for public comment and was advised that the document was tabled in Parliament in the month of December 2024. It was expected that anyone who wished to make comments had the opportunity to do so from that time.

I was also advised during this call that the notice for “public comment” advertisement was issued at first instance on January 19, 2025, with the comment period to end January 29, 2025.

This period of 10 calendar days from the first publication of this notice in the public written media is insufficient.

I do not recall hearing an announcement on radio or television advertising regarding requests for comment from the public this year. More significant is the fact that most Jamaicans do not read either the daily or weekend newspapers. So, any comment based on the advertised public comment period on the tabled bill will be minimal if any at all.

MORE AND BETTER EXPLANATIONS

Ten calendar days for public comment on a bill with such significant implications for governance in Jamaica is insufficient.

The lack of real public consultation and information throughout the process has not allowed any timely and meaningful input before it was tabled, making the comment process practically useless.

Since the present government has made changing the constitution to a republic form of government an imperative, it should have been accompanied by a significant effort to include and inform the public during the process.

Additionally, the town hall concept employed by the government has been ineffective, because it does not allow for a free flow of information and is limited in its reach as a result of its format.

Many Jamaicans have practical thoughts on governance but are not heard from, and therefore these are not considered. The members of parliament might have been tasked to go into their constituencies to explain the reasoning behind the constitutional change, and explain what the change entails.

Finally, what is the point of changing the current Constitution when most Jamaicans have no idea how the current one affects our present governance.

It appears to me that a change at this time will not improve the governance, education, or infrastructure of the country. So, for me, the current constitutional reform operation is a waste of time. The newly created ministry could be better served to undertake an education activity to reach out to all Jamaican citizens, explaining the current Constitution and its effects on our governance. If they cannot do this, then the Ministry of Education should take up this activity.

The current CRC, as it is called, has so far failed in its stated mandate to educate the public, and, before any change is made to this new form of government, we need more and better explanations of the current constitutional system.

HUGH M. DUNBAR

Bull Bay,

St Andrew