Lawyers: Referendum flawed
A legal opinion sought by the non-profit grassroots initiative, Cruise Port Referendum, has concluded that there are a number of serious flaws relating to the referendum process regarding the port and the draft bill, which will be debated in the Legislative Assembly on Monday.
Based on the significant legal issues surrounding the proposed bill, the campaigners have written to government urging changes to this bill that will address these problems to avoid a courtroom challenge.
From the phrasing of the question to the issue of campaign finance, public policy legal experts have found a long list of grounds on which this law can be challenged under judicial review, delaying the process. Campaigners are therefore urging the government to address the flaws as they debate the bill.
“It is our opinion that the process has been unfair from the outset and neglects to provide the highest standards of international best practice, fairness and equality which is crucial in the democratic process,” the CPR campaigners stated in a press release, in which they published the 16-page legal opinion and their letter to the government.
The activists explained that, following widespread concern from the community on aspects of the bill, which has created a perception of inequity, unfairness and being undemocratic, CPR said they instructed lawyers to look at their concerns.
Acting on their behalf, local legal firm Broadhurst sought an opinion from public policy experts in London and have sent the findings of Helen Mountfield QC, from Matrix Chambers, to various parties ahead of this debate to avoid a legal showdown and to keep the process on track.
The experts found a number of legal challenges over the order in which the government has set the process. But beyond legal technicalities, the lawyers have also found much more significant concerns for the voters.
Mountfield found the referendum question lacks neutrality, has wrongly included the issue of the cargo and that the date set creates significant problems, including the disenfranchisement of 220 new voters. She also noted the lack of control over campaign finance, the decision to allow the sale of liquor on Referendum Day, and concluded that the bill is unconstitutional as well as being incompatible with a global referendum convention, among other issues, all of which open it to a legal challenge.
In the press release outlining the decision to ask government to make the changes before it moves on any potential legal action, the CPR said the legal opinion confirms the concerns that they have been raising since they manged to collect the necessary number of signatures on the petition required to trigger a people’s referendum, as set out in the Cayman Constitution.
“We feel it is in the public interests to share this information as we are guided by the principles of accountability, transparency and good governance,” the campaigners stated in the release revealing the legal opinion and their request to government.
In the letter to government and other officials, the lawyers ask them to address the consequences of how it has so far managed the campaign and agree a procedure for the vote that would be compatible with the Constitution. The lawyers stated that the legal opinion makes it seem likely that, if they press ahead as is, the law would be unconstitutional, leading to a judicial review and a stay on the date of the vote as a result.
The lawyers indicate that the government campaigning to date and the use of public funds is contrary to the Code of Good Practice on Referendums, and urge it to change the approach to avoid the costly battle and delay. The lawyers ask government to amend the bill to create a fair and transparent people-initiated referendum, carried out expeditiously and without undue expense.
The activists said they were sharing the opinion with government and the public because it was important for voters to know all the details surrounding this referendum process before they cast their ballot.
“We all deserve to have accurate information on the referendum process before going to the polls to vote on this matter of national importance…” the activists stated, adding that they are “committed to representing the views of the public and have sought answers and information” from the Cayman government and the preferred bidder, Verdant Isles, for several months “with no acknowledgement or updated information and full details provided to date”.
The campaigners said they would continue to advocate and question the referendum process but also urged voters to lobby their own MLAs Sunday. They urged people to email their representatives setting out concerns they have about the referendum and asking them to vote to amend the bill, Monday.
From the phrasing of the question to the issue of campaign finance, public policy legal experts have found a long list of grounds on which this law can be challenged under judicial review, delaying the process. Campaigners are therefore urging the government to address the flaws as they debate the bill.
“It is our opinion that the process has been unfair from the outset and neglects to provide the highest standards of international best practice, fairness and equality which is crucial in the democratic process,” the CPR campaigners stated in a press release, in which they published the 16-page legal opinion and their letter to the government.
The activists explained that, following widespread concern from the community on aspects of the bill, which has created a perception of inequity, unfairness and being undemocratic, CPR said they instructed lawyers to look at their concerns.
Acting on their behalf, local legal firm Broadhurst sought an opinion from public policy experts in London and have sent the findings of Helen Mountfield QC, from Matrix Chambers, to various parties ahead of this debate to avoid a legal showdown and to keep the process on track.
The experts found a number of legal challenges over the order in which the government has set the process. But beyond legal technicalities, the lawyers have also found much more significant concerns for the voters.
Mountfield found the referendum question lacks neutrality, has wrongly included the issue of the cargo and that the date set creates significant problems, including the disenfranchisement of 220 new voters. She also noted the lack of control over campaign finance, the decision to allow the sale of liquor on Referendum Day, and concluded that the bill is unconstitutional as well as being incompatible with a global referendum convention, among other issues, all of which open it to a legal challenge.
In the press release outlining the decision to ask government to make the changes before it moves on any potential legal action, the CPR said the legal opinion confirms the concerns that they have been raising since they manged to collect the necessary number of signatures on the petition required to trigger a people’s referendum, as set out in the Cayman Constitution.
“We feel it is in the public interests to share this information as we are guided by the principles of accountability, transparency and good governance,” the campaigners stated in the release revealing the legal opinion and their request to government.
In the letter to government and other officials, the lawyers ask them to address the consequences of how it has so far managed the campaign and agree a procedure for the vote that would be compatible with the Constitution. The lawyers stated that the legal opinion makes it seem likely that, if they press ahead as is, the law would be unconstitutional, leading to a judicial review and a stay on the date of the vote as a result.
The lawyers indicate that the government campaigning to date and the use of public funds is contrary to the Code of Good Practice on Referendums, and urge it to change the approach to avoid the costly battle and delay. The lawyers ask government to amend the bill to create a fair and transparent people-initiated referendum, carried out expeditiously and without undue expense.
The activists said they were sharing the opinion with government and the public because it was important for voters to know all the details surrounding this referendum process before they cast their ballot.
“We all deserve to have accurate information on the referendum process before going to the polls to vote on this matter of national importance…” the activists stated, adding that they are “committed to representing the views of the public and have sought answers and information” from the Cayman government and the preferred bidder, Verdant Isles, for several months “with no acknowledgement or updated information and full details provided to date”.
The campaigners said they would continue to advocate and question the referendum process but also urged voters to lobby their own MLAs Sunday. They urged people to email their representatives setting out concerns they have about the referendum and asking them to vote to amend the bill, Monday.