That's one of the most informative Session and Educational discussion I have ever listened to in the longest while everyone was so attentive and respectful to each other in the presence of the former MP and PM Comrade PNJPatterson very good example
I am grateful that PJ found it his compelling duty to do this session. I admire the way he made his presentation, and how he continually stressed the NEED for Concensus. He recognized that it was not anout him, irrespective of the challenges presented in working with the opposition. A stalwart who recognized the dictates of LEADERSHIP. "IT Is Not About You"; BUT about the POPULACE who elected them to govern, and govern GOOD.
Ii thing all of you who attended this meeting will leave with a sense of direction in which Jamaican wants our leaders should behave well said Mr.PJ.Patterson God Bless
I truly appreciate every second of this presentation and discussion. I will re-watch this a few more times as I don't want to miss one scintilla of that which Mr. Patterson, et al imparted--especially that exchange with Mr. P.J. Patterson and Mrs. Marlene Malahoo Forte.
Truly said that when he mr Patterson go he would like to know that Jamaica will be a better and united place .why are we so divided ?we fight and feel that some are better then the other ,united we stand but divided we fall
What an astounding presentation! THIS is what should have started the CRC discussions as it provides grounding on the how our Constitution began and where we truly are with its improvement. The clarity this provides diminishes every off the wall criticism being levelled at our LO and reveals why we should make more effort to get the facts for ourselves. How did they colour a difference of opinion between PJ and the current LO is beyond me. Thank you beloved former Prime Minister Patterson. What a wake up call.
The was indeed a great discussion. It was compelling, forthright and contemplative. Our two elders, in terms political leaders equipped themselves very well and should be co-oped to be the surrogate.
Goodevening, so happy to see all of you but so so happy to see darling Hon,Mr Pattinson, you look good . THANK GOD you are here to past on what you know an experience, God bless you and God bless Jamaica land we love
Its really refreshing to see this level of discourse amongst past leaders and intellects. We need more of this and not supposed leaders talking about peoples wives and the size of their house. The gimmickery, cass cass, studpidity and verbage that undermines Jamaicas democratic institutions truly goes against the work that others have made since and before we became independent.
So Mr. Patterson has finally spoken. He said somethings that were clear and some less clear but by extrapolation we could arrive at the same place. We as 21st century inhabitants must recognize the shift in circumstances. At the crafting of the Jamaican Constitution surely the British had no intention of giving us total independence. I think that was fully recognized by Manley and Bustamante. Hence it was a matter of salvaging the optimum agreeable position attainable. With a bit of slyness our Representatives slipped in a curve ball and it was accepted. Any citizen of the Commonwealth means that a British Surrogate(s)could continue to control or disrupt the Jamaican Parliament. At that time Migration was directed towards the Motherland and Jamaicans had little interest in other Countries of the Commonwealth. Therefore that Clause had a specific meaning and intent. Our quest for total independence was represented by the "No Allegiance Clause". When Jamaica was a colony our people had free access to Britain, no special requirement. When the British changed the law that made Jamaicans aliens that shared Allegiance that PJ talked about became null and void. The Laws became disentangled and Jamaican Laws applied. The Privy Council has nothing to do with Independence and being an independent State. The same position as the CCJ. The relationship between the King and the British Parliament has changed, the role has become more Ceremonial. So the State of Britain is essentially separated from the Monarchy when the House of Lords was replaced by a separate Pillar of Government, The Supreme Court. The Monarchy No longer rules Britain. Similarly the Monarchy No Longer rules Jamaica. It is the laws that have not changed, kept pace with our new status but the administration is different. If the role of the GG is Ceremonial how can we say that the King is vested with Power of Appointment? PJ has said it, only Jamaicans should sit in Parliament where both leaders Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition are selected. PJ acted accordingly by his words, those with dual citizen had to renounce and as far as I am concerned the argument done. Every other country is a separate State and you cannot swear allegiance to two states. If the British man comes and swear to Jamaica he runs the risk of treason. The Australian Court established that when a Briton worked and helped Germany in their propaganda war he committed treason because he did not renounce. In addition the Court found that several MPs with British dual citizens swore allegiance to a foreign power and were removed. The same case in Jamaica why do we want a different result? All must go! And fined too because they knew the law and chose to break it.
Avoided fundamental questions of the day that needs to be addressed. Should we move forward with transitioning to a Republic without being hobbled by the question of making the CCJ the final court?
*“It is my considered view that section 40 should not be confined to parliamentarians but extended. In my time there were two appointments I had to make. The people disclosed to me that they held citizenship of another country. I told them, not putting any pressure on you, you have a choice. Renounce and stay where you are or if you want to accept this position, because of its sensitivity, you have to renounce. Both without hesitation, proceeded to renounce and were duly appointed to their positions.” ~ The Most Honourable PJ Patterson ON, OCC, KC* In lieu of using “another country,” it would have been instructive or provided more utility if Mr. Patterson exercised mot juste and unequivocally stated whether those two individuals were citizens of British Commonwealth or non-British Commonwealth nations-their 2nd citizenship as it were.
*“The Jamaican constitution was the first of its kind.” ~ The Most Honourable PJ Patterson ON, OCC, KC* What was/is seminal about the Jamaican constitution? I hope Mr. Patterson is not talking about the implementation of the "Leader of the Opposition" position. The United Kingdom made use of that reference as early as 1826. Tanzania 🇹🇿 (formerly Tanganyika) got their independence one year before Jamaica and the Jamaican constitution is largely a blueprint of the Tanganyika Constitution-before they went republic in 1962. From the Jamaica Independence Act of 1962: "In subsection (6) of section one of the Diplomatic Immunities (Commonwealth Countries and Republic of Ireland) Act, 1952, after the word “Tanganyika” there shall be inserted the word “Jamaica”
Jamaica's constitution is heavily shaped by the British monarchical system of government. This is evident in the country's excessively centralized UNITARY system of (local government) administrative governance...one built on the false notion/justification that Jamaica is too small for effective fiscal/technical/functional decentralization towards greater spatial/budgetary efficiency in public sector service delivery. Under the current UNITARY CONSTITUTIONAL structure of local governance the parish councils/municipal corporations are sub utilized (given that the bulk of local government funding is excessively centralized in a spatially moribund central government bureaucracy which embodies the (monarchical) essence of "spatial administrative dictatorship" (which deprives rural communities of the power to PROACTIVELY chart their own development via REGIONAL/COUNTY BASED fiscal empowerment. As Jamaica moves towards republicanism its leaders should examine not only the VERTICAL political essence of (re: federal) SPATIAL DIVISION OF POWER but also the SPATIAL/HORIZONTAL essence of DIVISION OF POWER towards fiscally and technically empowering the municipal corporations REGIONALLY (instead of nationally) in order to bestow heightened grassroots input in the PROACTIVE management of community development (in support of heightened grassroots quality of life indices).
*“There are some positions that I think have [sic] to make it clear that allegiances to Jamaica alone. For example the chief of staff. Otherwise, you're exposing the person to charges of treason.” ~ The Most Honourable PJ Patterson ON, OCC, KC* Mr. Patterson's statement is not logically sound. It is fallacious to claim that by merely being a dual citizen, a respective parliamentarian is more prone to or will be complicit in committing treason. The esteemed Mr. Patterson violated two fallacies: the false dichotomy and the fallacy of hasty generalization.
People in Jamaica were always being forced to give up dual citizenship, so it would be disingenuous to say that Jamaica allows it. Also, since we have all agreed that despite the Privy Council etc., Jamaica still rules in its own autonomy, it would be contradicting to say that being of Commonwealth makes any different. This is one of the things that touched me inside this meeting. I wish we could be honest without bringing that kind of low politics into it. PJ Patterson DOES NOT BELIEVE (Judging by his own assessments) that Jamaica allows dual citizenship, so why is he saying it? It is the same wording in the constitution of Guyana and Canada, so there is no difference. Again, we have had many situations in Jamaica where MOSTLY THE PNP, had called out against it. I am very disappointed.
The man responsible for the Jamaican economic disaster that lasted for 18 years. The ramifications of which have lasted for many years after. Hail the forever profound PJP! I agree though, Jamaica should leave the UK Privy Council.
Why is pj is gaving against mark golden mark golden born in jamaica and the next thing british is a common wealth country and jamaica is a common wealth country so what is the problem what is wrong with all of u peoplethere is more serious problem injamaica to deal with
Thank u for this valuable and informative session. Hon. P.j Patterson I appreciate your discourse so graciously presented.
That's one of the most informative Session and Educational discussion I have ever listened to in the longest while everyone was so attentive and respectful to each other in the presence of the former MP and PM Comrade PNJPatterson very good example
A breath of fresh air to say the least.
I am grateful that PJ found it his compelling duty to do this session. I admire the way he made his presentation, and how he continually stressed the NEED for Concensus. He recognized that it was not anout him, irrespective of the challenges presented in working with the opposition. A stalwart who recognized the dictates of LEADERSHIP.
"IT Is Not About You"; BUT about the POPULACE who elected them to govern, and govern GOOD.
Ii thing all of you who attended this meeting will leave with a sense of direction in which Jamaican wants our leaders should behave well said Mr.PJ.Patterson God Bless
An absolutely brilliant discourse!
I truly appreciate every second of this presentation and discussion. I will re-watch this a few more times as I don't want to miss one scintilla of that which Mr. Patterson, et al imparted--especially that exchange with Mr. P.J. Patterson and Mrs. Marlene Malahoo Forte.
Truly said that when he mr Patterson go he would like to know that Jamaica will be a better and united place .why are we so divided ?we fight and feel that some are better then the other ,united we stand but divided we fall
What an astounding presentation! THIS is what should have started the CRC discussions as it provides grounding on the how our Constitution began and where we truly are with its improvement. The clarity this provides diminishes every off the wall criticism being levelled at our LO and reveals why we should make more effort to get the facts for ourselves. How did they colour a difference of opinion between PJ and the current LO is beyond me. Thank you beloved former Prime Minister Patterson. What a wake up call.
Very wise commentary. Especially the strengthening of local government. Well done!
PJ still very sharp!
So much said here to be set in stones ..and taught in our academic institutions
The was indeed a great discussion. It was compelling, forthright and contemplative. Our two elders, in terms political leaders equipped themselves very well and should be co-oped to be the surrogate.
Mr. Patterson’s anecdotes were priceless-Relative to Tony Spauldings, Norman Manley and especially when he approximated Bustamante’s sound!
Extraordinary Lecture, History and Perspective
Age is just number a number by the Most Hon . P J Patterson .
Goodevening, so happy to see all of you but so so happy to see darling Hon,Mr Pattinson, you look good . THANK GOD you are here to past on what you know an experience, God bless you and God bless Jamaica land we love
Thank you, PM Patterson. ❤
Its really refreshing to see this level of discourse amongst past leaders and intellects. We need more of this and not supposed leaders talking about peoples wives and the size of their house. The gimmickery, cass cass, studpidity and verbage that undermines Jamaicas democratic institutions truly goes against the work that others have made since and before we became independent.
So Mr. Patterson has finally spoken. He said somethings that were clear and some less clear but by extrapolation we could arrive at the same place. We as 21st century inhabitants must recognize the shift in circumstances. At the crafting of the Jamaican Constitution surely the British had no intention of giving us total independence. I think that was fully recognized by Manley and Bustamante. Hence it was a matter of salvaging the optimum agreeable position attainable. With a bit of slyness our Representatives slipped in a curve ball and it was accepted. Any citizen of the Commonwealth means that a British Surrogate(s)could continue to control or disrupt the Jamaican Parliament. At that time Migration was directed towards the Motherland and Jamaicans had little interest in other Countries of the Commonwealth. Therefore that Clause had a specific meaning and intent. Our quest for total independence was represented by the "No Allegiance Clause". When Jamaica was a colony our people had free access to Britain, no special requirement.
When the British changed the law that made Jamaicans aliens that shared Allegiance that PJ talked about became null and void. The Laws became disentangled and Jamaican Laws applied. The Privy Council has nothing to do with Independence and being an independent State. The same position as the CCJ.
The relationship between the King and the British Parliament has changed, the role has become more Ceremonial. So the State of Britain is essentially separated from the Monarchy when the House of Lords was replaced by a separate Pillar of Government, The Supreme Court. The Monarchy No longer rules Britain. Similarly the Monarchy No Longer rules Jamaica. It is the laws that have not changed, kept pace with our new status but the administration is different. If the role of the GG is Ceremonial how can we say that the King is vested with Power of Appointment? PJ has said it, only Jamaicans should sit in Parliament where both leaders Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition are selected. PJ acted accordingly by his words, those with dual citizen had to renounce and as far as I am concerned the argument done. Every other country is a separate State and you cannot swear allegiance to two states. If the British man comes and swear to Jamaica he runs the risk of treason. The Australian Court established that when a Briton worked and helped Germany in their propaganda war he committed treason because he did not renounce. In addition the Court found that several MPs with British dual citizens swore allegiance to a foreign power and were removed. The same case in Jamaica why do we want a different result? All must go! And fined too because they knew the law and chose to break it.
Does anyone know the name of the attorney seated beside Professor Tracy Robinson ?
Uncle PJ ✊🏽
Avoided fundamental questions of the day that needs to be addressed. Should we move forward with transitioning to a Republic without being hobbled by the question of making the CCJ the final court?
Hear hear hear
I appreciate this interview! However why you PJ never try to make some change to this when you were in power?
I fear you weren't listening attentively enough--PJ provided several examples of his attempts to inform the changes in question.
*“It is my considered view that section 40 should not be confined to parliamentarians but extended. In my time there were two appointments I had to make. The people disclosed to me that they held citizenship of another country. I told them, not putting any pressure on you, you have a choice. Renounce and stay where you are or if you want to accept this position, because of its sensitivity, you have to renounce. Both without hesitation, proceeded to renounce and were duly appointed to their positions.” ~ The Most Honourable PJ Patterson ON, OCC, KC*
In lieu of using “another country,” it would have been instructive or provided more utility if Mr. Patterson exercised mot juste and unequivocally stated whether those two individuals were citizens of British Commonwealth or non-British Commonwealth nations-their 2nd citizenship as it were.
I see what u did there moderator. You my friend is very smart 😅😅😅
*“The Jamaican constitution was the first of its kind.” ~ The Most Honourable PJ Patterson ON, OCC, KC*
What was/is seminal about the Jamaican constitution? I hope Mr. Patterson is not talking about the implementation of the "Leader of the Opposition" position. The United Kingdom made use of that reference as early as 1826.
Tanzania 🇹🇿 (formerly Tanganyika) got their independence one year before Jamaica and the Jamaican constitution is largely a blueprint of the Tanganyika Constitution-before they went republic in 1962. From the Jamaica Independence Act of 1962: "In subsection (6) of section one of the Diplomatic Immunities (Commonwealth Countries and Republic of Ireland) Act, 1952, after the word “Tanganyika” there shall be inserted the word “Jamaica”
...at the feet of Gamalia...
Jamaica's constitution is heavily shaped by the British monarchical system of government. This is evident in the country's excessively centralized UNITARY system of (local government) administrative governance...one built on the false notion/justification that Jamaica is too small for effective fiscal/technical/functional decentralization towards greater spatial/budgetary efficiency in public sector service delivery.
Under the current UNITARY CONSTITUTIONAL structure of local governance the parish councils/municipal corporations are sub utilized (given that the bulk of local government funding is excessively centralized in a spatially moribund central government bureaucracy which embodies the (monarchical) essence of "spatial administrative dictatorship" (which deprives rural communities of the power to PROACTIVELY chart their own development via REGIONAL/COUNTY BASED fiscal empowerment.
As Jamaica moves towards republicanism its leaders should examine not only the VERTICAL political essence of (re: federal) SPATIAL DIVISION OF POWER but also the SPATIAL/HORIZONTAL essence of DIVISION OF POWER towards fiscally and technically empowering the municipal corporations REGIONALLY (instead of nationally) in order to bestow heightened grassroots input in the PROACTIVE management of community development (in support of heightened grassroots quality of life indices).
I categorically agree--I share this very concern.
*“There are some positions that I think have [sic] to make it clear that allegiances to Jamaica alone. For example the chief of staff. Otherwise, you're exposing the person to charges of treason.” ~ The Most Honourable PJ Patterson ON, OCC, KC*
Mr. Patterson's statement is not logically sound. It is fallacious to claim that by merely being a dual citizen, a respective parliamentarian is more prone to or will be complicit in committing treason. The esteemed Mr. Patterson violated two fallacies: the false dichotomy and the fallacy of hasty generalization.
How strange are we that we could use the term honorable and PJ in the same sentence? How about teef adn dishonourable?
Are you able to empirically substantiate that which you intimate?
People in Jamaica were always being forced to give up dual citizenship, so it would be disingenuous to say that Jamaica allows it. Also, since we have all agreed that despite the Privy Council etc., Jamaica still rules in its own autonomy, it would be contradicting to say that being of Commonwealth makes any different. This is one of the things that touched me inside this meeting. I wish we could be honest without bringing that kind of low politics into it. PJ Patterson DOES NOT BELIEVE (Judging by his own assessments) that Jamaica allows dual citizenship, so why is he saying it? It is the same wording in the constitution of Guyana and Canada, so there is no difference. Again, we have had many situations in Jamaica where MOSTLY THE PNP, had called out against it. I am very disappointed.
Markie g born in jamaicawhat is oun problem
I don't need pj to teach me about the construction he broke them all heon the pnp lock them up 2 😢
The man responsible for the Jamaican economic disaster that lasted for 18 years. The ramifications of which have lasted for many years after. Hail the forever profound PJP! I agree though, Jamaica should leave the UK Privy Council.
Very biased comment. Be balanced.
😂😂😂 smh
Why is pj is gaving against mark golden mark golden born in jamaica and the next thing british is a common wealth country and jamaica is a common wealth country so what is the problem what is wrong with all of u peoplethere is more serious problem injamaica to deal with
Who made all these laws is,nt the white monarchy of england not the black of Africa not marcus none of our brilliant scholor