Miller warns of class action
(CNS): The independent member of the country’s parliament representing North Side has warned the government that it could face a law suit regarding the massive inequity that exists in Cayman’s political landscape. With the introduction of the Bill of Rights this month and the confirmation that in the next general election George Town electors will be able to cast six votes compared to the single vote given to his constituents and those in the neighbouring district, Ezzard Miller said government could face legal class actions from registered voters for what is clearly political discrimination. Miller stated that multi-member constituencies also fall foul of the main body of the 2009 Constitution, which could also see government in the courts.
Speaking during the debate on Wednesday evening on the motion for the next general election and the additional seats, which was brought by the premier, Miller said it had been a “long, long, long, long time in coming”. The motion was based on a report which was competed in June 2010 and Miller said that, of the three recommendations made, the government had picked the worst one.
The independent member noted that even the commissioners had said that giving two more seats to George Town would create a worrying unevenness of power for the capital’s voters.It would give them a far greater influence on the make-up of government compared to those people voting in single member constituencies.
“I have tried in several ways to give government the opportunity to implement one man, one vote,” he said. “I moved a motion asking for the appropriate amendments to the Election Law and I was part of a group that started a people-initiated referendum, which was hijacked by government as soon as they discovered we were going to getthe votes needed.”
Although 65% of people voted for one man, one vote, it was not enough to pass the government’s threshold. But that, Miller said, does not change the conflicts the government now faces. He pointed out that the additional votes in George Town in particular not only conflict with the constitution itself but also the Bill of Rights
Pointing to Section 92 of the constitution, Miller read that “any person who is registered as an elector in an electoral district is entitled to vote for an elected member,” he said. “I have been unable to find any definition of ‘an’ that is plural. So in the election of 2013, while we may have multiple representatives in the districts, each elector is only entitled to vote for one candidate,” he said.
Miller said that, in order for the election to be constitutional and lawful, the government will have to use the first past the post principle in districts where there are more than one seats and the candidates that get the most votes will win. “But each voter should only be allowed to vote for one,” he added.
Miller said he did not know how government was going to get around this constitutional issue because the only justification for what the MLAs were doing in the parliament that evening — voting for such large multi-member districts — was because people on the government benches believed they have more chance of getting elected if there were more seats.
Alongside the constitutional problem government faces with its decision on how it plans to settle the question of the additional seats, was article 16 of the Bill of Rights, which states that government cannot discriminate against any person on various listed grounds, one of which is political.
Reading from the Bill, he said, “Government shall not treat any person in a discriminatory manner affording different and unjustifiable treatment.” But with this motion the government was deliberately giving George Town voters six votes, he said, and “committing a discriminatory act against the people I represent, and this will make a very interesting class action suit.” “We still have time up until today as the Elections Office said they are ready to implement one man, one vote,” Miller stated, as he issued a warning about the legal action the government was very likely to face on several fronts.
“This motion which places six representatives in the district of George Town … in my opinion is the most unequal way possible we could have implemented the increase,” he said, adding that he could not support the bill.
“I can serve notice now that whenever the government brings the Election Law I will be filing an amendment to change section 44 to tie in with 92 of the constitution, stating that no person shall cast more than one vote for an elected member,” he said.
However, the independent member warned that if government does not make the change, wherever a law has not been amended to comply with the constitution, that document takes precedence.
He said that “any law not in compliance with constitution and not yet amended shall be read as if it is already amended. As section 92 of the constitution says 'a representative”, Miller said, section 44 of the election law is in contravention and has to be read as if already amended, giving government no option but to allow all voters on election day only one vote.
Category: Politics
Ezzard needs to grow up and at the minimum learn the laws of this Terrutory! Class action! What a fool
Mr. Miller let me say this. I COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY AGREE with your position. I would ask you to not be PPM and pray for someone to launch it. If you are in belief of this then YOU do it and let others join you.
The last time we relied on the courts to resolve an issue, BT Elections issue, our dare friends at the PPM who had numerous people in the BT area namely but not limited to:
3 Candidates in Anthony Eden, Charles Clifford, Osbourne Bodden. Another MLA in Kurt Tibbetts and as I understand it their chairman, a lawyer, in Mr Duckworth.
Why was it that neither of these 5 people lead the charge to unseat the two UDP candidates is beyond me.
Does anyone here think the if the tables were turned that Mr. Bush would have let the ink dry on the BT Election results before he himself would have spareheaded a legel claim against the PPM? Anyone?? I thought not.
This is PPM downfall in a nutshell. They STAND for nothing. Don't believe me? Look at when Chucky wanted to march….what did PPM do? Nothing.
When Mr. Ezzard spearheaded the OMOV initiative, what did PPM do? Nothing. "we have always supported it…..". That is not enough. We would have OMOV if PPM threw there complete and utter support behind it.
Mr. Miller I am a BTers and I wish I resided in NS to supoprt you and your efforts. Unfortunately all I have is PPM and UDP which basically means PPM.
oooh XXXX Ezzard got him again!
Hol tight Ezzard you are right again to point it out, but instead of fixing their mess, expect them to bash you, investigate you etc
i endorse these points and approve this message! fair is fair. justice and equailty for all! one man one vote by hook or by crook! what a bunch of jokers our parliamentarians are debating round and round, ducking and diving and wasting the peoples time. they should all be considered artful dodgers!!! one thing is for sure its time for a change in representatives, in west bay , george town and bodden town!
Since there are not class action law suits under Cayman law it would be very interesting indeed. What we need is proper equal size seat distribution and the abolition of rotten boroughs like North Side.
you don't need a class for this suit, just a plaintiff from northside or east end
still bemused at ezzards muted performance on the tv debate a few weeks back……..
Don't be bemused at Ezzard's muted performance on the TV debate a few weeks back, silence is golden especially when you are dealing with the kind of people who know not that they know not, silence is truly golden as was the case. Don't worry about Ezzard's silence, may I suggest that If you are so concerned please hold your breath and do a repeat of the show while you wait for his reply.
22:56
You have no idea how an indepndent candidate should act when on a panel with two other different political party menbers who have different views and different ideologies.
Mr. Ezzard Miller acted wisely, It was Alden and McKeeva's time to go head to head or neck to neck, they are the Two leaders of the two political parties. It was Mr. Millers time to be a spectator and answer knowledgeably, when asked a question and state his concerns .ALL OF WHICH HE DID very articulately., I suggest you study some more about how politicians should act. and also how you should think about an MLA who fights day and night for our freedom Like Mr. Miller, Respect the Man.
A good point well made Mr. Miller, but sadly the one man one vote argument has already been lost for the time being.
Once the sensible people of George Town send The UDP packing in May 2013 there should not be a long delay in changing it the way way you say….right?
In the meantime, what are your thoughts on Mr. Ridley’s position, namely that all permanent residents should be registered to vote?
although Ezzard's stated policy is not to respond to people who don't have the balls to sign their name. I can assure he would never support either of Mr. Ridley's takeover proposals.
What are you talking about? Tim Ridley did put his name to the article. And it would be interesting to see where Mr Miller draws the line on participation in the franchise. Clearly its not paying taxes, nor being resident, nor even having the right to reside. So what is it – second generation? Third? Fourth? Never if you cannot establish a generational presence before some cut off date, and which date? Simply taking a position that the franchise should be limited to Caymanians without then defining Caymanian is weak.
Hold his a_ _ to the fire Ezzard