Candidates still in question

| 28/04/2009

(CNS): Despite what is written in the Constitution, Mark Scotland has insisted that both he and Dwayne Seymour are qualified to contest the election. “We believe we are now in compliance with the requirements of the Election’s Law and the Constitution and are proceeding in that regard. We have had communications with the Elections Office and they concur with that statement,” he said this morning on radio. However, the Elections Office has confirmed to CNS that no one from there hasconcurred with any statement as it is not a position to do so.

Supervisor of Elections Kearney Gomez said this is an issue for the Grand Court and not the Elections Office. Attorney General Samuel Bulgin has also confirmed that this is an issue for the courts.

In an emailed response to various questions placed to him by CNS, the country’s top attorney said the questions could only be conclusively determined by the Grand Court after hearing all the facts and considering the relevant law(s). 

Joining Charles Clifford, however, for a candidate’s debate on this morning’s (27 April) edition of Rooster’s Crosstalk hosted by Austin Harris, Scotland said it was not the case that he and Seymour were disqualified.

“We have been duly nominated in accordance with the relevant laws of the Cayman Islands,” he said, adding that it was an oversight that the contracts were not declared within the deadline but they had now both published the details. “To our knowledge based on our legal advice both here and the UK, we believe now that we are in full compliance with all requirements under the Constitution and Elections Law.” As a result, they were now able to contest the election and be elected come May 20, he stated, and said the decision should be made by the voters of Bodden Town.

Clifford said he believed that the failure was an oversight but he was not sure that changed the legal consequences, but it was not for him to decide. “This is a matter for the Elections Office, the governor and the attorney general,” he added. “Those three offices owe it to the country and … the people of Bodden Town to make a public statement on this matter and to do so as quickly as possible in relation to what their thoughts are … I think the people of Bodden Town certainly deserve that well in advance of Election Day.”  But he said that whatever their thoughts are and regardless of it being just an oversight, as he understood the Constitution the candidates were currently disqualified from holding office.

The attorney general told CNS that his office could not offer an opinion at this juncture as it would be mere conjecture, which would not be very helpful and lead to more questions. So it is unlikely any public statement will be made on the issue before 20 May from either Bulgin’s office or that of the governor.

Gomez and Colford Scott from the Elections Office also noted that this is not a matter for them. While the candidates were in compliance with the Elections Law on Nomination Day, this is a constitutional matter, they both said, which has emerged since that date and it could only be decided by the Grand Court. Gomez confirmed that no one at the Elections Office has been authorized to make a statement on the matter as there was no provision in the law for them to offer an opinion or take action as this does not concern the Election Law.

Scott said no one from the office had concurred with the position as stated by Scotland. Gomez however, explained that under the Elections Law they could not be challenged until after Election Day as they had already been nominated. Scott confirmed that the Elections Office would play no part in this and the only way the Election Law would apply is that it gave provision for a candidate to withdraw under Section 31 if either candidate were to voluntarily step down before the poll.

The Bodden Town candidates that have spoken to CNS have confirmed that they will challenge either Scotland, who at the last election polled almost 41% of the vote and came in fourth, or Seymour if either were to gain enough votes to be elected because it is a serious constitutional matter, and despite the fact that it may have only been an oversight, they all said that it is fundamental to the principle of the Constitution which must be upheld and cannot be dismissed as a technicality.

Any challenge will be defended by either candidate if they garner enough votes to be elected, according to sources close to the UDP. However, so far legal opinion remains divided on what would then happen. Most local advocates prepared to offer comment stated that they believed the challenge would be upheld because of the clear nature of the disqualification, but opinion diverged over the question of whether or not there would be a by-election or whether the fourth elected candidate would be awarded the seat. Further questions have also arisen on whether Scotland or Seymour could then run in that by-election. Three of the legal experts who spoke with CNS said that there was no precedent for this issue in the Cayman Islands, and consequently the judge would be directed to look at precedents in Jamaica to help determine a decision.

One of the three said the question of the by-election may well come down to the question of whether "voters have definite knowledge of the facts that disqualify a candidate from being eligible at the time of the election.” He stated that if due to news reports and public awareness the voters understood the consequences of the law, votes cast for the disqualified candidates would be considered void and the next valid candidate would be considered elected. This was based on a recent case from the Jamaica Supreme Court which addressed that very issue and would be regarded as persuasive authority here, the lawyer noted.

Steve McField, a well known local attorney who said this was not just a mere technicality but a breach of the constitution, added that the issue would definitely have to be decided in the courts and he had strong opinions on what he believed would be the decision and the consequences.

However he was particularly concerned that the candidates were ignorant of the Constitution and were still running for office. “How can you stand for election in a sophisticated jurisdiction such as this and not know the Constitution?” he asked, noting that at the very least all of those contesting for the office should know that document.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Category: Election 2009

About the Author ()

Comments (78)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymous says:

    For goodness sake; Charles Clifford lied – he lied when he resigned; remember he was going into private practice, he lied about speaking to the then governor – governor said no such conversation took place – he was later found guily of wrong doing; yet still we allowed him to continue serving not only as  member but as a Minister.

    This matter is not an issue until after the election, the men have to be elected before they can be challenged.  Although I get the drift that there are others who think Bodden Towners will be stupid enough to elect/re-elect them so they have their teams promoting scare mongering on this site.  If it was your intention to vote for Mark and Dwayne; what should stop you now.  All I can read is Mark lied – well he is without sin cast the first stone.

    For the ignorant gentleman who insist on every site in the Cayman Islands that Mark only knows about "FUTBOL" well thank heavens for that as his involvement has stared many trouble youths clear of wrongdoingl that his involvement in "FUTBOL" has given any of out youths opportunites that they would be over looked for.  Although my son was not a trouble youth, he never played "FUTBOL’ but by coming in contact with Mark, the ecouragement  and opportunities given to him by Mark I can proudly state that my child is overseas in University doing very well.  I am quite certain that there are many more mothers and fathers who will echo similar sentiments.  But for those who choose to stiffle your conscience and that Mark has not done anything – you need to ask for forgiveness, as you all know better.  He too has a young family and relatively new business, he cannot spend all his waking moments sitting around at waterholes and gossiping.


  2. Bodden Towner the Bone says:

    John John Thanks for the Clearity on Rooster this Morning JOB WELL DONE. You Represented your district well. Bodden Towners Please do the Right thing come May 20th and Vote UDP all the other stuff is rubbish right now please put that all behind and concentrate on your smart, wise, and very successful campaign. GOOD LUCK GUYS.

  3. Fed Up Caymanian says:

    I have posted twice here now and see nothing. Something wrong?

    CNS: Your comment is posted below

  4. Bodden Town Mayor says:

    Mark lied on the Rooster show Tuesday morning, he lied by failing to gazette his government contracts because he didnt want us to know how much money he has received from the PPM Government. How can he be trusted ? No way Mark….it aint goin to happen this time. By the way, you performed poorly in your debate with Minister Clifford……you were obviously reading from the UDP’s prepared script. I guess no one from the UDP has an original thought. The Hon. Minister was head and shoulders above you… just don’t have the understanding of the national and international issues. We dont have the time now in these challenging times to train you on the job !!! 

    • Anonymous says:

      You Need to get a grip on yourself and get the fact before answering to something that you don’t have the facts on. MARK SCOTLAND IS GOING TO WIN THIS ELECTION YOU ARE ONLY ONE VOTE SO GO SIT DOWN SOME WHERE WITH YOUR UNETHICAL YOURSELF.

  5. Barnes says:

    The problem with the Jamaica decision is that the facts are very different. It’s a whole other matter to declare government contracts vs. having dual citizenship.

    The reasoning behind placing this provision in the constitutution is different from that of dual citizenship. The former goes to the integrity of the individual to disclose the fact that they make gain financially from their position – it’s a whole other matter!

  6. Fed UP Caymanian says:

    How ironic is it that we now have PPM candidates admitting that they too were late in filing thier interest, yet on all of these postings by the PPM supporters and surrogates- we have heard NOTHING about their candidates. But they continue to blaspheme against Mark and Dwayne. It is truly sad that just because Mark is poised to be the First Elected Member for Bodden Town, that his opponenst and their supporters have chosen to undermine his credibility. Even Chuckie conceded on Rooster that it was an over-sight.

    What the PPM and thier supporters/surrogates MUST be concerned about is the total lack of trust that the MAJORITY of the Cayman Islands have in theor leadership and governance of this country. <Maybe the PPM should address the following:

    – High Crime with crimes being committed in this island like we have never seen before;

    – High Cost of Living- (tell me how $1.83 can feed you for a day);

    – High Un-Employment- yet the Ministry charged with ensuring that CAYMANIANS find jobs, is the very same Ministry that employes well over 75% EXPATS. Thanks alot Alden!!!!!!!!!!!!;

    – A snowballing public debt;

    – Out of control borrowing and spending

    – Misuse of public funds by civil servants in Ministries (using Government resources to print funeral programs and Government vehicles to set up for campaign meetings);

    – An education system that is in a sink hole;

    – Misuse of the peoples money being spent to IMPORT a band for OUR National Heros Day whilst ignoring our talented school children and local musicians;

    – Low moral in the Civil Servants especially with Caymanians, while the expats continue to make fun of the Caymanians- Alden PLEASE check your MInistry;

    – un repaired homes from Ivan- PLEASE do not blame this one on Big Mac. IF he had been there, it would have been done.

    – 4 years of empty, broken and unattainable promises

    I could go on and on but the CNS webiste would be jammed and this is not what we need. By the way, thank you CNS for this forum. the real picture is that the country is in a state that will certainly go down in history as the worse ever. The past 4 years has been years of no management and leadership by the PPM and for this- THEY MUST GO. I will give credit where credit is due and thank Arden for the repaved roads and the new ones he has built. Dont like his demeanor and attitude- but he certainly gets the job done. Does this mean I support him? Absolutely NOT. But I am a fair person and when does good, I will give that person credit- such as I have done here.

    To Mark and Dwayne- hold your heads up high. Yes you had an over-sight but it was simply that an OVER-SIGHT. You are no different than those who too have failed to do what they are required as has been proven in a recent Compass article.

    UDP- May 20 its the PEOPLES time and we will send a clear and resounding message to the PPM that they are no longer needed or required and because of this, we the people are cutting our support and allegiance. In closing, I was a PPM suppoter in 2005….but my conscience will not allow me to do it again

    • Anonymous says:

      "But they continue to blaspheme against Mark and Dwayne".

      Do you not know the meaning of "blaspheme" or do you really think they are God?

  7. Anonymous says:

    Well it doesn’t seem like anything can be done until they are challenged by an elector, another candidate or the Attorney General AFTER they are elected and if they are challenged it has to be taken to the court. No one has ever been challenged on this issue before and there is nothing that says the court wouldn’t rule in their favour, the constitution only says that whatever the court rules is final, so it looks like we have to wait until after the election to see if they are successful at the polls.

  8. Anonymous says:

    The concern here is the use of public office to potentially further one’s own personal/financial gain. Potential conflicts of interest exist where a politician or a family member has an ownership or interest in a firm that does business with the government or that can benefit from government policy.

    Most mature democracies recognize the need to limit the impact/risk of private economic interest on elected politicians and at the very least require them to report those interests. Within the EU every member state except Luxembourg has that requirement for parliamentarians. Public accountability is necessary for the control of corruption.


  9. Devil in the Details says:

    Talk about rushing whilst I was at work on my earlier post. I should have written Suzanne and West Portland and not Suzanna and Westmoreland respectively….sorry

    The below links are very interesting and quite similar to our situation but at the end of the day it cost Jamaica quite a bit of time and money to end up at the same end result…………makes you wonder if it was worth it all??  It would probably be more appropriate and quite civic minded if Mark just bowed out gracefully so as to avoid all this mess actually but that is clearly a personal decision…………………..

    and if you are really ambitious you can read the below judgement by the Chief Justice (the press release from the Electoral Office of Jamaica was QUITE interesting because it sought to dispel rumors that the people of West Portland would have wasted their votes if they had voted for Vaz………….) sounds familar??

    • Anonymous says:

      "The judgement of the Chief Justice (the press release from the Electoral Office of Jamaica was QUITE interesting because it sought to dispel rumors that the people of West Portland would have wasted their votes if they had voted for Vaz………….) sounds familar??".

      You are still missing the essential point of that judgement. The only reason the votes were not wasted is because the Director of Elections had misled the electorate to believe that the candidate Vaz was qualified and not disqualified. They therefore voted in good faith and this was the reason for the bye-election. The judgement has nothing to do with dispelling rumours. Vaz was indeed disqualified and the Director of Elections had erred in declaring that he was qualified. It seems that candidate Scotland is now seeking to mislead his electorate that the Elections Office has made a similar statement. 

  10. fuzzy says:

    These two are disqualified ,theres no doubt it and I agree with a previous poster that as such they should not be placed on the ballot.Certainly if the Attorney General cant decide ,then the Governor should consult the FCO.Theres absolutely no reason for Caymanians to have to pay for a by-election just to satisfy arrogant politicians .

  11. Devil in the Details says:

    I was able to listen briefly to the talk show today in regards to this very issue and after googling the similar issue that happened in Jamaica as mentioned by Suzanna. It seems the 2007 General Elections in the parish of Westmoreland was contested because the winner (Vaz) had dual citzenship so his victory was contested and after a year + of legal battles etc it seems a bi-election was deemed as the final decision and was then completed recently and he won again by a commanding lead and is now finally over.

    So if I would base our situation on that precedent I guess if the people of BoddenTown really want Mark as their candidate they will have to still vote for him come May 20th and IF he wins Sandra or one of the other candidates will then have to contest his victory and a bi-election would have to be done and the people would have to vote for Mark again to send the clear message that he is who they want.  Now the above summary is quite simple and does not take into consideration the amount of time and expense that the country will be burdened with as a result of this very silly oversight!!!!

    I am not a BT voter but if I was I would simply not vote for Mark because this is his second time running and our country is in a dire mess and we really do not need to be wasting money that we do not have because of someone’s silly mistake. There are quite a few promising independents…but hey I leave that to the people of Bodden Town to decide.

    It is quite ironic as well because Bodden Town is the one district which has seen the LEAST progress under this administration and will need some serious work!!!!  It is quite unfortunate really



    • Anonymous says:

      Devil in the Details,

      The Vaz case is a little more complex than you suggest. There is a certain test as to whether there would be a bye-election vs. votes thrown away.

  12. Shameful says:

    Mark had promise as a young politician but he has lied and the Election Officials have confirmed this so I will no longer be voting for him. So its Chucky, Theresa and Justin now. Yes Mark Justin has taken your place.

    You should do the Honourable thing and withdraw from the race now !!! That way maybe the people of BT will consider you again next time !!!

  13. BT Voter says:

    No one should be surprised that Mark lied on Rooster yesterday morning and the Elections Office confirmed his lie…..after all his failure to declare and gazette his government contracts was simply another form of lying. I figure that Big Mac told Mark not to gazette the contracts because it would undermine their election strategy that the PPM has wasted money when a lot of that money went to Mark’s company, ARCP.

    One would have thought that Mark was smart enough not to be led into this mess by Big Mac….but then again as a previous poster said Mark isnt the sharpest knife in the drawer or the brightest light in the room….speaking of bright lights did you all listen to the debate with Chuckie and Mark yesterday morning on Rooster. He na no competition for Chuckie….that really was unfair competition Mr. Chuckie…… I was planning on voting for Mark, Chuckie and Tony but after Chuckie exposed Mark’s inexperience and dullness yesterday I’ve dropped Mark from my consideration for a vote… Chuckie and Tony you’re good to go with my vote…..who else is there…..Ossie perhaps ? Help !

  14. Anonymous says:

    I just wish people would just leave this alone now.  It has been enough said!!! If someone wants to give these young men a vote, then it’s their business. As far as I know the AG has said they are not disqualified to run but if elected, then they could be challenged.

    • Anonymous says:

       "As far as I know the AG has said they are not disqualified to run but if elected, then they could be challenged".

      The AG has made no statement as to their qualification/disquafication to run. He has merely said that it is for the courts to decide. Please don’t start saying that  " the AG has concurred with my statement that I a qualified to run" now. That would be another lie.  

  15. Anonymous says:

    Did Mark not run in the last election and therefore should be well versed in the rules and regulations?  In addition, whoever is in charge of the individuals campaign should certainly have advised each party member on this requirement.

    Oh, and please stop issuing the "poor sod this and that".  It has nothing to do with poverty and everything to do with stupidity!  Not every person who runs for politics is qualified, equipped or surrounded by the proper resources to do so.

  16. Richard Wadd says:

    The Law States,  "A person shall be Qalified to be Elected as a member of the Assembly, and SHALL NOT BE QUALIFIED to be so Elected if ….."

    Section 19, sub-section ‘G’ states;

    G) is a party to, or a partner in a firm or a director or manager of a company which is party to, any contract with the government of the Islands for or on account of the public service and has not in the case of a contested election, caused to be published at least one month before the day of the poll, a government Notice setting out the nature of such contract and his interest, or the interest of any such firm or company, therein;

    Please note where it says,"….caused to be PUBLISHED at least one month before …."

    Based on this, the Elections office cannot even add them on the Ballot, as they are NOT QUALIFIED to run for office.

    Sad, but true. The same applies to any other candidate of any persuation.

    The ONLY solution would be to postpone the Election.



    • Anonymous says:

      Richard Wadd, there is no question of the general election being postponed to accommodate the default of one or two candidates. If there needs to be a bye-election for BT then these two candidates should pay the costs of it.

  17. Walking Dead Politically says:

    They are not eligible if someone challenges them.  If they win the seat they will be challenged.  There will be no by-election. A vote for either of them is at most a protest vote.

    • Anonymous says:

      They are not eligible FULL STOP. It does not matter whether someone challenges them or not. In either event they are still not eligible. What is the basic malfunction that is apparrently causing so many persons to miss this fundamental point. It is Thursday today whether or not someone challenges that assertion. No court can make it Wednesday or Friday. A challenge is therefore irrelevant and forcing one is only going to potentially expose the country to civil unrest!

  18. noname says:

    had enough of this story now. please lets move on.l either they are disqualified in which case someone needs to say so …or they are not.

  19. Objective.. says:

    We should stop trying mark and dwayne via media. At this stage there is nothing that can be done until either wins and if someone challenges. and in that event this will go to the courts. This issue is not as black and white as many would have you beleive.

    There is a question of whether they have breached section 19 of the constitution. That question will answered in courts if either wins and someone challenges and not before then.

    Any public conclusion/assertion to the effect that they are "disqualified" is inaccurate and should be regarded as political slander at this stage. whether they are disqualfied or not is now a matter of law and the courts.

    Voters are already aware now that there is a chance that if Mark or Dwayne wins there may be a challenge. If they feel that their candidate is on the right side of the law or that there is a reasonable explanation for what appears to be a breach, they have a right to vote for them. Now let democracy continue and let the laws and the courts play their role.

    • Anonymous says:

      The Objective,

      It is silly to say that any expression of opinion that the candidates are disqualified is inaccurate or slander. This will continue to be an issue unless and until it is resolved by the courts. Until then freedom of speech permits commentary. It is your right not to read or participate in that commentary.

      The candidates themselves can help to reassure voters by publishing the legal opinions they say they have received from both local and UK legal advisors that show that they are in full compliance with the Constitution.     

  20. Anonymous says:

    The weakness of the Governor and those around him is as astounding as it is dangerous. Stating that something as clear as this is a question for the Courts is as ridiculous as declining to declare that theft is unlawful and makes you liable to arrest. Is that a question that only the Courts can decide on too? Some things have to be accepted and should not be denied. The Earth is Round. The Election is on May 20. The Constitution prohibits these candidates from taking their seats if elected. Does the Governor or Attorney General really feel unable to confirm any of these three basic truths? – or are they just being weak and ineffectual and exposing the country to potential unrest.

  21. Sport N Zone Man says:

    Let us not confuse the 2 matters:

    1. Declaration of Interests: Yes, Alden and others did not declare their interests on time – that is in a law – penalites not even stated. No one is giving them right for this and they should not use an excuse of being too busy either. Who cares about them running a campaign? They supposed to be running the government and we don’t want any excuses there either.

    2. Government Contracts: In the CONSTITUTION: highest law of the land. Here’s the problem with Mark and Dwayne. This is a legal matter. Notice how here the recourse is that any registered voter can challenge it. That remedy alone should let us all know how serious it is. The candidates had more than enough reminders. The deadline and method of notice is very specific.

    I’m not interested in either party but I do agree that if Mark wins he will be challenged. I was very disappointed to hear him lie on the radio about having the support of the Election’s Office – did he not think anyone was listening to the radio?

    McKeeva should really make him step down. He already knows (from their phone polls) that Mark is not that strong anyway – they have undertaken a propaganda campaign to convince people otherwise; but those in the know are well aware that his popoularity has dropped significantly since the last election.

    Part of the reason for this is that he’s very calculated and people recognize that. He has done nothing for the people of BT – unless you count futbol and handing out turkeys/gift baskets at Christmas as a pressing issue.

    Mark is also not the sharpest knife in the drawer. Most of the UDP candidates cannot think on their own and only repeat what they have been rehearsed to say. Mark is no exception. His hatred can be heard in the manner in which he speaks.

    All in all I would not have voted for him anyway; but with all of these latest developments piling up this only confirms my decision more so. I think more people are actually seeing Mark for what he is.

    Sadly John John does not have a chance in HELL of getting in and the UDP is just using him. Poor soul.

  22. Richard Wadd says:

    No-one is above the Law. If we start making ‘exceptions’ in the enforcement of Laws, where will it end?

    Will we become like Jamaica, where one former Prime Minister boldly declared that "the LAW shall not be a schakle"??? What next?? Will we become another Turks & Caicos??

    While I have always believed that Mark Scotland would be a good candidate, one must question the character of a person who is willing to ‘begin’ a political career in such a manner. My advice Mark, take your ‘licks’ like a man, bow out with dignity, and next time around, do it right.

    As for ‘not-so-big Mac’, you have not as yet been returned as LGB, and yet you are so bold as to make challenges to the application of the Law? May I remind you that you too are no Lawer, and definately no Judge.

    While Cayman needs leadership with more ‘Balls’, we do NOT need a Dictator. Do not think that we will return you to LGB for you to continue on the same path you were on before.

  23. Anonymous says:

    This election must be about the issues facing the country!!

    Tourism in decline

    Financial Industry in decline

    Unemployment on the rise

    High Crime

    Uncontrollable debt

    Poor healthcare

    Caymanians being left out

    Families hurting

    and on and on……. It is clear that despite them trying to make everyone believe otherwise the PPM are humans too!!! They missed the deadline on their declaration of interest by one month!

    The PPM have proven that they cannot lead the country and left us in this terrible position – that is the biggest issue to consider in the election on May 20th!!! Do we want our country to continue in the same direction???

  24. Anonymous says:

    Even Desmond at Cayman Net  News believes these 2 are wrong!–8-8—.html

  25. Twyla M Vargas says:


    What do you think this mean. in reference  to the topic.  Figure it out.

  26. Anonymous says:

    The PPM know that the only way they can get back in is by default!

    • Anonymous says:

      interesting to see that there is no comments on this. I think it could be said that they were trying to "mislead" the voters by not declaring their finances! Are they trying to hide something from the public? They don’t want us to now know what their new financial interests are????????? Hmmmmm.

      “The pressures of running a country while running a campaign are immense,” he(Alden) told the Caymanian Compass last week. “Sometimes things slip you.”  – so how come this works for PPM but not UDP????????????

      Stay strong Mark and Dwayne……you’ll be just fine! Definitely have my vote and 5 others!!!

  27. A concern Caymanian says:


    Let’s grow up people and stop picking and blaming each other wait until May 20th  and vote for who you want to vote for, but for now leave UDP and PPM alone and lets act like men & women and stop being children grow up and be the adults we need to be
  28. Anonymous says:

    Everyone… No law is being broken that is why Mark and Dwayne are stilling running. If they were breaking any laws the Attorney General and the Governor would have made a statement.

    Let’s just STOP talking about this matter and start talkingabout the country. CNS… Please serve the people faithfully and inform us of other things happening within the country that is of greater concern.

    • Anonymous says:

      "Everyone… No law is being broken that is why Mark and Dwayne are stilling running. If they were breaking any laws the Attorney General and the Governor would have made a statement".

      You’re right that no law is being broken – the  Constitution is being broken. THe Attorney General has made it clear that he considers this a matter for the courts. If it were not an issue he would not have said that. However, what is far more troubling is that (if it is correct) Mr. Scotland lied about the Elections Office being in agrreement with his statement that he is in full compliance with the Constitution. That is now an issue about the integrity of the individual and that is a serious election issue. Like Mayor Kwame Fitzpatrick of Detroit it may not be what you did that gets you in trouble, but lying about it (if indeed that is what he did).   

      UDP are happy to distort the facts and make misleading statements about the current Govt. in order to garner political support. However, when a real issue arises with their candidates they wish to have it hushed up.  

  29. Mario Rankin says:

    The difference here is that Mr. Jim Bodden was elected to the LA by the people of BT before giving up his US citizenship which is why the Governor would not swear him in and there was a bi-election.  The matter in which is before Mark and Dwayne is similar, but not the same because they did declare their interest before election, it was filed a few days pass the deadline and not after which indicates there was no intent to deceive.  So, lets save the country the cost of a bi-election and let the people of BT decide who they want to represent them – which is our constitutional right.


    • Concerned BT voter says:

      We can debate this until the Elections in 2012 or 2013 but it is not a simple matter of Mark and Dwayne just failing to declare their interest on time and that they are just "a few days pass the deadline". The declaration of interests is something completely different than them specifically stating government contracts they may have.

      As far as I know the declaration of interests is simply a candidate stating what interests they have in a company or companies, their position in relation to that company or companies, their income/stipend or whatever they are paid, if anything etc. However, what they failed to comply with will specifically address any contracts they have with the Government. Point being everyone knows that Mark Scotland is the Managing Director of ARCP which is something he would have indicated in his declaration of interests but does hat register specify what government contracts ARCP has with the Government? I don’t think so.

      The Constitution is clear, no candidate is qualified if they do not file this 30 days before Election Day. The mere fact that Messrs Scotland and Seymour are willing to simply dismiss this as an "oversight" should cause concern… is a breach of the Constitution, plain and simple. If they are willing to simply dismiss this as an oversight, what else would they be willing to dismiss as "oversights" if they are elected?

      Another cause for concern: I am not sure who is lying or where the misunderstanding is but for Mr. Scotland to get on the radio and publicly state that the Election Office has concurred with his belief that he is not in compliance and the Election Office to then rebut this to say no one from that office could have given Mr. Scotland that kind of assurance is worrisome. Is Mark making up things as he goes along? This is certainly misleading the voting public. Be very careful Mr. Scotland your integrity is at stake here.

      If he does in fact have supporting legal opinion locally and from the UK by all means publish these opinions. Any lawyer who is worth their salt would be quite foolish to advise Mr. Scotland at this point that he is in compliance when there is no ambiguity of Section 19 of the Constitution.  There is nothing in the Constitution which addresses late submissions so the gentlemen have either fully complied with the requirements or they have not.


  30. Anonymous says:

    CNS was the first to report Mark and Dwayne missing the constitution deadline. How come they aren’t posting anything about the PPM and Independant candidates that missed there filing which was published in today’s Compass??  This is how your news agency will lose it’s credibility.

    News agencies are suppose to be fair and informative across the board. Just when CNS was building up its creditbility, it just shows that you can’t give up on the good old Caymanian Compass.

    • Twyla M Vargas says:


      Many of us are quick to critize the Cayman News Service for this and that, but how many of us have paused to say Thank you  Cayman News Service for a job being well done.  I know they must have a very good editor who is either laughing their head off of pulling out the little bit of hair they have left on their head reading some of these comments.

      If it was not for Cayman News Service we would not be able to get such a good heart beat in the mornings with a fresh cup of coffee while  rushing to see these comments,  and questions. 

      Do you really think any other News paper could have handle this so well?  I do not think so.   So take a deep breath, say thank you CNS and start  the comments rolling again.  I never thought reading comments could be so sweet.   Some of them are hilarious. keep it up.

      Start laughing at some of the comments being  made, and you will not believe how stress free it is;  and remember  please, do not refer to people by their  names saying bad things about them  in a personal way, not everyone can take it, and you will  be surprised how much you will enjoy the comments.  Blessed 

  31. stew beans says:

    it is so immature of us all to be debating this issue when the law of the land is clear.

    i am neither ppm or udp and do not understand how ppm can be blamed for udp’s negligence  in not declaring their interests. sorry but it is time to stand up and take responsibility guys. isnt that what running for office is really all about. oh i forgot  to the partys ( both of them) it was always only about power and control.

    mark, i like u as a person and dwayne too, but the time has come to gracefully step down.

    what about making a compromise in the best interest of the country??

     when and if this all finally plays out,we all know that the people of the cayman islands will have to foot  the bill for this legal rambling  the result of which is quite clear from the outset.

     please gentlemen, be like the iron men of old and graciously step down is my advice. with two lawyers running in your district  there should be no question, that this will definately be contended if either of you get elected to office. so why continue to go the distance? you need better advisors dudes. trust me! we will all respect you more by being real iron men and bowing out now. save the country some expense. please, especially in these hardship times. bow out now!!

     personally, i think it is best for the entire country to have a legislature made up of 5, 5 and 5.

     5 udp

    5 ppm

    and 5 independent

    that, in my opinion is  a true reflectioon of the wishes of the caymanian people!!

    it seems to me that if you both step oput now the chances of that being a relaity are closer to being relaized than any other option.

     i say it is high time that we all do something for the good of our country instead of always asking our country to do something good for us!!

      god bless us all



  32. Anonymous says:

    To: Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 04/28/2009 – 18:55.

    Much as you might wish I am afraid the issue isn’t about to go away. A breach of the Constitution which disqualifies you is a serious matter. It is not to be confused with updating the Register of Interests.  

  33. Anonymous says:

    Since PPM was now late , as discovered by the Compass, I’m sure that we won’t be hearing quite so much about it. But I am intrigued that PPM would use the Cancer Society staff images without permission.. I am doubly puzzled as to how they thought that that image was going to tie into their Progress theme! It gets stranger and stranger. They obviously have a full library of images at their fingertips, through GIS. It appears they’re making full use of them through most of the collateral material in their campaign, so why throw that in there? Weird. I think that if the Cancer Soiety did not approve the use, than PPM should remove it immediately, or at the least make a sizable donation to the society for the use of the young lady’s image.

  34. Anonymous says:

    The declaration of their interests show that Mark & Dwayne were not trying to hide anything so PLEASE stop insinuiting that.  They neglected to have their Government Contracts gazetted within the time line as outlined in the Constitution and this requirement does not form a part of the Election Law.  Have we so quickly and conventiently forgotten that the PPM Government spent over $6 million dollars on a Hurricane Insurance Policy that we found did not cover the Sister Islands because they failed to read and understand the fine print also.  Big Costly Mistake there too!!!  So PPM supporters STOP your selective filtering of mistakes made for criticism.  Good Luck Mark & Dwayne.   

  35. The Enforcer says:

    Your knowledge of the law if flawed!

    • Anonymous says:

      I dont know if it is the UDP, PPM or PIP that is responsible for coooking up this pot of stew, however it seems to me that Mark and Dwayne are both irresponsible politicians and as the show goes on are looking more irresponsible to me, therefore I wont be wasting my vote on them.

  36. Anonymous says:

    My opinion I think Mckeeva is just as much at fault .You know why???? Being the leader of that party and one of the longest serving members in the house he should know the rules by now and could have informed the group .That is poor leadership for sure .And futher more the two at fault should have read the rules themselves .I hear it was only 27 pages long there children could have read it for them much less.

  37. Anonymous says:

    Further to today’s Caymanian Compass, I hope everyone now realizes that we are all humans. PPM and UDP alike. The PPM candidates ALSO forgoting to file there interest shows that  this can happen to ANYONE. The difference is, the PPM candidates were a whole month late. Mark was only 4 days.

    Let’s drop this issue, focus on the problems we are facing and see who the people want in on May 20.

    • Anonymous says:

      Appears to me that these registers are two different things. The one you are referring to is an existing list at the L.A. which just needed to be updated or maybe even confirmed that it was still the same.

  38. The Enforcer says:

    Dear, “Election office has no application form or checklist just take the $1000 ask no questions?”

    They gave all candidates a 27 page handbook. Mark and Dwayne have no excuse at all. They did not read that, did not read all the notices in the newspapers, did not listen to the radio reminders and did not read the constitution.

    Now, he is lying about being qualified to run. This is a sad day in the Cayman Islands.

    Dishonesty is dishonesty by any name.

  39. Anonymous says:

    And you call yourself Caymanian?

    I am still not sure what the issue is? They failed, under the Constituation, the fundamental law of the Cayman Islands, to qualify.  There are many sections of the Constitution that would disqualify someone and this is just one of them so why should we ignore it because they couldn’t understand the document.  After all, they would not be the first Candidates, UDP or not, to have publically admitted to not knowing what our Constitution says which is ironic considering they are telling the voters to vote "NO" on the new Constitution.  That would mean that they don’t even know what they are saying "NO" to so somebody has told them to take that stance.  How can you call yourself Caymanian if you have not read our Constitution, especially with all the publicity, translations and explanatory guides that have come out over the past year.  Why should we let these Candidates, and the UDP undermined the Constitution of our country which, by nature of its definition, is the fundemental law determining the political principles of a government .  And we are supposed to throw it aside because they didn’t read it? 

    Give me a break Cayman!  If we don’t take a stance on this then in it is a clear indication that we are willing to accept corruption and blatant disregard for our laws into our governance.

    If the Governor does his duty, their names won’t even make it onto the ballot paper.



  40. Anonymous says:

    To avoid any more wasting of time…

    They did NOT meet the requirements of the Constitution, section 19-1(g) and are subject to not being able to be seated.

    The last time this occured was with Mr. Jim Bodden. he was elected by the people then on the day of the swearing in, the governor read a statement saying that he was not swearing him in and was passing the matter over to verify if he had sworn allegiance to the US.  The UK Government found that Mr. Bodden had sworn alleginace to the USA and had not revoke it thus it was presented to our Grand Court here and Mr. Bodden was  found to be Disqualified under section 19-1 of the Constitution.  Sounds familiar??

    The seat became immediately vacantand a by-election was held in Bodden Town.  Mr. Jim Bodden won that byelection 6 or 9 months later

    This is what is going to happen here if Mark of Dwayne wins…simple as that.  Nothing to do with PPM, nothing to do with UDP!

    The Elections Office has nothing to do with it. It is with the Governor, Attorney General and the Grand Court.


    • Anonymous says:

      "To a void any more wasteing of time". Thanks for bring this FACT to light … I hope that the issuse of Mark and Dwayne can now be put to rest for the time being and allow the elections to proceed.

  41. Anonymous says:

    How much longer is CNS and the PPM going to beat this subject to death. Please find something else.  How many times are you going to reiterate  and  post the same old crap for the PPM’s fodder.  I say leave it alone and let the Bodden Town voters decide. Beating up on the reputation of two good men in this manner does none of us any good!! Come on CNS, you are becoming the sounding board of the PPM party.  Enough let the people decide!!!!


  42. BT Voter says:

    Whether or not the omission to declare their interest was intentional thefact remains they have not met requirements. I believe in the Constitution and what it stands for and it should not be trampled upon. This is the same Constitution that elected members have to SWEAR to uphold when taking office. What this fiasco has done is discourage people from voting for the constitution and not vote at all on May 20th – these two candidates are disqualified regardless of what they may say. There is no changing the constituion. The Governor is put in place to uphold and defend the constitution and needs to step in now before things really blow up. I can guarantee Bodden Town will not be a nice place on Election Day if this isnt remedied now. Let voters know what their choices are at this point and issue a clear statement. Honestly initially I was going to vote for Mark Scotland and Justin Woods but at this point only one individual will get my vote….Justin Woods. At least this young man is honest and can speak his mind …..without having a script to read from. Its so sad I believe that Mark is a brillant young man with lots of potential he just needs to stay away from party politics.

    The Governor needs to solve this now or will we wait for England to step in and solidify their belief that Cayman is not capable of handling their own affairs. It’s sad….really sad.


  43. DirtyPPM says:

    I vote PPM the last election but after 4 years Mr Scotland is the most popular candidate in the Bodden Town district …no matter how hard the PPM trying but the can’t keep a good man down….Vote UDP!!!!!!

  44. Twyla M Vargas says:


    i AM  getting confused now.  Today on radio debate Mark said that they are qualified to contest the election, and had communications with the election office and concur with that statement.  However the elections office is saying that no one concured with them.  What,s going on anyway?

  45. anonymous says:

    Election office has no application form or checklist  just take the $1000 ask no questions? we could have a non caymanian as a candidate or may be a criminal on the run or a communnist . the regestered voter is more investigated that the candidates? two  very decent  law abiding  caymanias being persecuted by the ellection office neglegence .  they will run and win then the courts will call for a by ellection and they will win again . if they are not allowed to run the elected officers will never be accepted  by the caymanian would be labeled  as a FRUDELENT ELLECTION

  46. The Enforcer says:

    I cannot believe he LIED on the radio this morning. When I heard him my mouth dropped open with shock and awe.

    CNS thank you for exposing him. He fabricated that story completely. Is this really who we want in the LA? Everyone can go and listen to the Rooster show on their website and hear this bold face lie for yourself.

    Mark – anyone that gives you a vote after this and cannot see that you are another McKeeva in waiting is really CLUELESS.

    Please Bodden Town DO NOT elect corrupt people in the house.

    It’s one thing if we do not know that they are corrupt; but how can we elect someone who has already DEMONSTRATED the propensity to be dishonest?

    • Twyla M Vargas says:


      Find out first if he really lied, because, He said, and the Elections Office said.  and as As far as I am concerned it is another Mix up.



  47. Anonymous says:

    Same old UDP making up the facts as they go along just to suit themselves

  48. CaymanLeamon says:

    This is just another dirty trick by the PPM to try and hold on to their incumbents in Bodden Town.

    SHAMEFUL. But what else should we expect from the only political party who has a member that was found guilty by the Commission of Inquiry.

    Oh, and guess where that member was elected? Bodden Town!

    Shame on you PPM!

    • Anonymous says:


      Sounds like the pot calling the kettle black. The Leader of the UDP is the only Minister ever to have been removed from office by the Governor due to scandal surrounding his dealings.

      The PPM did not cause Mark and Dwayne to fail to comply with the Constitution. They were negligent and did not read the relevant provisions of the Constitution and/or obtain proper advice.  

    • Anonymous says:

      How can you blame the PPM for something that the UDP is at fault for?The PPM did not hold these candidates against their will so that they were unable to do what was necessary to qualify … stop blaming the PPM government for SILLY UDP mistakes. What other silly mistakes will they make IF they (and God I pray they don’t) get elected and are the leaders of our country???

      Stop being so CHILDISH and UDP need to own up for their SILLY MISTAKES!

    • Anonymous says:

      Let me see!

      Consider: the Elections are held, and the majority of people vote for Mark Scotland and he wins.

      Why would the PPM be so dirty as to seek to overturn the clear choice of the voters by seeking to set aside the election results?

      Answer: Because PPM is full of a bunch of power hogs that would do anything – even refer to their dead mother’s on stage – to invoke a little emotion and stay in power.

      • Sav/New says:


        I think Scotland has seriously disrespected our Constitution and others. It’s like he’s taking this all for one big joke. Making up lies like some primary school kid hoping to weasel out of it. This should show his followers what he is all about, but then again, ‘birds of a feather flock together’, so there’s probably no hope there. Sorry to say, but all those defending him with this and voting for him is sure to have been born with no common sense, or not much of a brain!      
        • Anonymous says:

          One can quickly identify a PPM supporter: always calling this one and that one stupid.  Remember, at the end of the day we are all Caymanians.  How can we expect the world to respect us when we don’t respect ourselves.  How people must be laughing at us as we denegrate each other over an election.  At the end of the day all of the candidates who win a seat will goto work together and be civil; can you say the same about yourself or would you have destroyed valuable relations just to satisfy your candidates?

          Respect one another and let politics take care of itself.  We don’t need any outside help in ridiculing each other, we are doing a fine job of our own.  Hope no one gets upset when outsiders repeat all these names we have been calling each other for the sake of politics. 

  49. Anonymous says:

    It is disappointing if it is correct that Messrs. Scotland and Seymour are falsely claiming that the Elections Office has concurred with their statement that they are in full compliance with the Constitution. Unfortunately, it would put in doubt the claim that they have received legal advice both here and in the UK to that effect. Perhaps the two gentlemen would be kind enough, for the assistance of their electorate, to publish the legal opinions they have received.  The voting public is entitled to make an informed judgement as to whether any votes case in favour of either of these two gentlemen would be wasted.

  50. Anonymous says:


    I can see the PPM has all their cronies trying to make this an issue, as opposed to (and perhaps CNS can run an article on these), for example:

    Caymanians currently unemployed;

    Caymanians living like animals in trailer homes – since Ivan

    The status of the CUC report that was never released to the Public and the reason(s) why PPM didn’t approve its release;

    These are stories that CNS might like to write on.

  51. Anonymous says:

    Good luck Mark and Dwayne…trust that the Bodden Town people will give you both a chance to represent them on 20 May 2009.


    • Anonymous says:

      Based on my knowledge of the law, I am of the opinion that both Mark and Dwayne will be eligible to keep their seats once they win the BT election.  For one, they willingly disclosed the information under the constitution just 4 days after learning  of this requirement.   it is very obvious that these two were not seeking to cover up anything and a good QC will argue this point successfully and a Judge will rule accordingly .

      BT, keep the faith and continue to support both Mark & Dwayne- they are the progress that we are looking for and need in this time of uncertaintity.  Today’s headline in the Compass announced that others in the PPM also forgot to make disclosures.  Just goes to show how these things can happen to any and everyone.

      Under pressure, these two  fine UDP candidates will demonstrate to the electorate that the only loser is one who quits, and trust me, that is certanily not their intention BT. They will ride this wave to the shore and emerge victorious.

      Let’s ask the PPM to begin to address the issues of : unemployment, rising crime, declining tourism product,  threat from Cuba’s new role in the market, $28M deficit, unfinished schools, unrepaired hurricane Ivan homes thtoughout the entire Cayman Islands,  declining gov revenue, rising cost of living, people losing their homes and living in cars, and the list goes on.  This is what the public want to hear; you talk about solutions to these pressing problems and leave everything else to the voters.



      Vote UDP for a Better Way Forward.

      • Anonymous says:

        "Based on my knowledge of the law, I am of the opinion that both Mark and Dwayne will be eligible to keep their seats once they win the BT election."

        My guess is that you put your knowledge of the law on the back of a postage stamp.

        Assuming they both win (and that’s a big assumption) everything hinges on whether the candidate who places 4th brings an Election Petition. If that happens all bets are off.

    • Anonymous says:

      Oh my goodness.  What a shameful bunch.  Sadly I am not entitled to vote (or stand) but I could run this village with 3 assistants, 6 adminstrators,2 doctors and 1 accountant and still have time to go fishing and look after my family on half days.  We would still need all the policemen/women sadly, and the Complaints Commissioner and the Auditor  General.

      FGS.  Wake up and smell the coffee. The CI Govt is a cash cow government employer of last resort.  Get real and grow up.  Or let the people who could do it, do it