By J. K. Roberts (Sound Public Policies Advocate )

Whilst the principal meaning and application of the term “self-determination” in relation to the independence of a nation surround the emancipation of slaves and the eradication of colonialism, the situation creates the internal political privilege for dominance and decision-making by a ‘powerful’ group over the masses of the nation, who typically reflects and enables the ‘exploitive attitude’ of the colonial proprietors. Generally, this fundamental change entitles the locals to manage national affairs, “in our own image and likeness”, including the formulation of foreign policies with the freedom of alignment with other nations. The process concerning the development, recognition and prominence of Self-determination is anchored in the 14 December 1960 Declaration of the General Assembly of the United Nations on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. The Declaration “characterizes foreign rule as a violation of human rights”, “proclaims that colonialism should be brought to a speedy and unconditional end” and, affirms “the right of all people to self-determination … / … the independence for countries and peoples under colonial rule”.  It is critical however to understand the parameters and conspiracies about Self-determination, even as manifested or practised by those nationals who have been entrusted to lead, and are posing and campaigning for Reparations for slavery.

After undergoing different stages of social, industrial and political struggles since the 01 August 1834 enforcement of the Slavery Abolition Act, Grenada gained full Independence on 07 February 1974 with a National Constitution which symbolizes the instrument for its Self-determination. The Constitution establishes where, how and with whom the supreme authority lies, and the fiduciary contract which the Authority must fulfill with the masses.  The Preamble, or what could be the Explanatory Memorandum, of the Grenada Constitution Act (Cap. 128A, 2010 Revised Laws), gives the ‘foundation and essence and functioning’ of democratic or representative governance which should bring ‘beneficial reality’ of Self-determination to the Grenadian-people.  Although not all of them are ‘familiar and firm’ about the Constitution, the representatives of the people through the provisos for general elections and the Houses of Parliament, are required to take the Oath of Allegiance to “Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Her Heirs and Successors”, and the Oath of Office to “honour, uphold and preserve the Constitution”; and thereby having those representatives demonstrating the preparedness to exercise best practices of ‘loyalty and honesty’ serving in the best interests of the nation. The amalgamated interests in connection with Self-determination extend the cultural, diplomatic, social, economic, ethical and legal realms; but sadly, far-reaching relationships and agreements are often forged without the knowledge of the masses.

The most evident ‘active’ expression of Self-determination by the masses, with the ‘freewill’ exercise of democracy within a five-minute period, is confined to “the right to vote” at general elections.  After the certification of the sovereign ‘choice, confidence and control’ gained from the elections, the masses are subdued as mere ‘spectators and supporters’ of the ideology and projects which have been designed and undertaken in the “image and likeness” of the powers-that-be. The frightening observation, moreover, is that the ‘enthusiasm, capacity and robustness’ towards the activism and ascension of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) against the improper attitudes and actions of the political leadership seems to have been squashed over the years, and thus the imperative ‘check and balance’ role of CSOs in national governance is not sensed as Grenada journeys into another fifty years of Independence. With this observation becoming a reality, the sovereignty, patrimony, traditions, and resources within the land space, air space and sea space of the nation are at stake.  Although it could be argued that Grenada’s Self-determination is based on the version of democracy whereby the masses empower representatives to act in its “own deliberate judgement”, there is the inherent ‘ownership and partnership’ of the masses in the affairs and assets of the nation, which those representatives forming the political leadership must respect in order to engender patriotism and pride, as well as shared liability and losses, in the masses.

Some analysts would claim that Grenada is strong on ‘inclusive participatory’ governance which is the formula and fuel for Self-determination. The nationwide consultations in the preparation of the annual Budget will be cited as an example.  However, the extent to which the views expressed at those sessions are realized in the execution of national policies, in accordance with the expectations of the masses and in comparison with the influences of external parties, must be weighed.  Indeed, costly ‘superficial and futile’ undertakings such as towards Grenada’s 2014 Social Compact which has been designated as “A Partnership For The Sustainable Development Of Grenada For The Benefit Of All Its People”, can be also identified.  The Social Compact registers the commitment of the Social Partners “to working together to create conditions in which every Citizen can realize their full potential and enjoy the rights and privileges as a member of the Grenadian family”.  The Social Partners with passionate and painstaking discussions, assure to “build on the unique expression of family and community that distinguishes Grenada …. leverage the richness of our traditions and embrace the opportunities for change that are available”.

As for the Social Compact, the masses are yet to grasp and feel the relevance and impact of Grenda’s 2019 National Sustainable Development Plan 2020-2035 (NSDP) with the adherence to its performance regime of indexes; this is so, especially since elections manifestos and budget presentations of ‘arbitrary and narrow’ political intentions take center stage. The NSDP was developed and marketed as “a Plan for Grenadians by Grenadians … for Grenada’s development agenda and priorities … firmly grounded in Grenadian realities … built on the aspirations of the Grenadian people”; the process received technical and financial assistance from the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean.  With the guiding National  Vision thus: “Grenada, a resilient and prosperous nation, with a conscious and caring citizenry, promoting human dignity, and realising its full potential through sustainable economic, social, and environmental progress for all”; the NSDP “envisions the functioning of an economy and society that is premised on genuine partnership in which the Public Sector, Private Sector, Civil Society, Youth, and wider Non-State Actors share collective responsibility for Grenada’s sustainable development and play complementary roles in the process of nation building … for significant national transformation … also guided by the regional and international development context”, keeping the National Core Values intact.

On the celebrations of its Golden Jubilee, the preoccupation and engagement of the people should be on evaluating Grenada’s status of Self-determination; not merely in terms of what have been achieved, but on pointed and objective discussions about what should have been and why not, and about what must be done and by how going forward.  What has Self-determination brough to Grenada, along with any consequences and / or costs? What are the challenges and compromises which Grenada experienced during its first fifty years of enjoying Self-determination, and what should be the platform for optimizing and securing this Status into the next fifty years?   Any reproof about Grenada’s status and feats arising from Self-determination thus far, should not be construed as considering or comparing what its level of national advancement would have been if it were still a British colony, but rather as contending that the governance by its political leadership degenerates the nation to a state of vulnerability. This degeneration has resulted through the abuse of power, with reckless and corrupt practices facilitated with no serious ‘mechanism for redress’; and the vulnerability is evident through the gauging of Grenada’s stifling debts, its inability to navigate global shocks comfortably, and its dependency on external sources for survival.

There is the perpetual craving and quest by several diverse forces for supremacy in the governance of Grenada, and this momentum for control takes on pervasive hostilities and leads to dangerous political polarity amongst the people. The power-play for defining and directing the nation’s trajectory results in the 13 March 1979 overthrow of the elected Government by an anti-democratic force which then formed the Marxist-Leninist People’s Revolutionary Government (PRG) and put aside the Constitution.  Were the Overthrow, the PRG and the suspension of the Constitution truly ambitions and acts of Self-determination of the masses; or was the ‘philosophy and purpose and pursuit’ of that political force endorsed by the masses?  Did the strategy by the Leading Actors of those events, to describe the uprising as being “popular” with the masses, to engender participation and empowerment of the masses, and to establish laws and institutions in the name of the masses, meet the requirement and reality of Self-determination?  The demise of the PRG on 19 October 1983 highlights further the fatal choice which a ‘limited and minimal’ group, having access to the official particulars and connections of the nation, including the financial and military assets, can execute so as to impose its political vision on the masses.

Being mindful of the global standards and trends as relates virtually to all areas of life, and that existence and prosperity in the global community depends on inter-dependency and inter-networking amongst nations, it follows that Self-determination of the masses in Small Island Developing States (SIDS) like Grenada becomes a delusion, and / or is irrelevant.   In fact; the ‘sophisticated and subtle’ foreign control of nations, in the form of Neocolonialism with its imperialistic influences in shaping the policies of the thematic areas of governance is taking a drastic toll on any meaningful concept and gains of Self-determination for those once colonized nations. There is the ‘pressured and inevitable’ adoption of the objectives and conditions of international institutions like the United Nations with its seventh Sustainable Development Goals purported to transform the world; the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank with fiscal management recipes which hurts the livelihood, way of life and quality of public services for the masses; and the European Union trade agreements and protocols. Defaults and breaches by the nations of the treaties, result not merely with forms of blacklisting but with forms of compensation such as the Debt-For-Nature Swap which Grenada may be ‘actively and readily’ ensuing or consented to, under its Blue Economy pursuit.  Instructive is the 21 November 2022 ‘alert’ article “The Financialization Of Conservation – The Case Of Debt Swaps For The Oceans”, on The Transnational Institute (TNI) website.

Could it be denied that on its Golden Jubilee of Independence, the Government of Grenada has virtually surrendered and rescinded the ‘status and rhythm’ of Self-determination for the nation, by the ‘manner and circumstance’ of the signing of the Samoa Agreement?  Despite the damage control, the concocted defense and the ridiculous play-down by the Government about the 22 November 2023 ‘shocked and controversial’ signing, the critical concern surrounds the lack of ‘knowledge and examination’ by the masses of the more than 400-page ‘comprehensive document’ which is “legally binding”, and which in turn speaks about the ‘trademark, methodology and inclination’ of the Government. The fact remains that the Prime Minister, a novice politician but veteran attorney, alleged at a National Press Conference on 22 November 2023 that he has “not read the Agreement”; and moreover, the ‘required ratifying’ of this Partnership Agreement between the European Union and its member states, and the members of the Organisation of African, Caribbean and Pacific States, within the jurisdiction of Grenada threatens its cultural, conventional and constitutional norms, and the dignity and sovereignty of its future generations.  The Grenadian-people is placed in a ‘precarious and questionable’ scenario about its political trajectory, which also calls for deciphering the message and motive of the powers-that-be for the different versions of pronouncement surrounding the Independence celebrations. The pertinent themes promoted are “Forward into 50: Reflecting on our Past, Solidifying our Future” in the 2023 Throne Speech; “Grenada at 50: Empowering our People, Transforming our Nation” by the 2024 Budget Statement; and “One People, One Journey, One Future” of the National Organising Committee for the celebrations on 31 October 2023. The transformational agenda of the 23 June 2022 Administration of the National Democratic Congress (NDC), which also purports “to rewrite” Grenada’s history, must be measured, monitored and moderated by the masses, as the previous two-part article “Grenada Transforming Its Identity And Legacy At Golden Jubilee” points to the political power-play.  Other ‘troubling and regrettable’ approaches of the NDC-administration include its scheme to demystifying the Citizenship By Investment (CBI) programme, and thereby luring the people to tolerate a mechanism which disrupts the socio-economic landscape and demographics of the nation, at the perils of the masses; this is so, especially when considering the increases of the population via the rate of CBI Approvals as compared with the rate of births by natives.