The Hidden Legacy:
Articulation of the Assault on African Cultural Retentions and Institutional Discrimination against the Rastafari Community in the Commonwealth of the Bahamas.
(Part of The Report to Constitutional Committee by the House of Rastafari, 2013)
Presented by: Ean (Bongo I-an) Maura
Why in a land so bountifully blest with more than enough for all should there be such inequality... Why should strong men seek work in vain and children be deprived of a good high school education...These questions form part of a puzzle of our times and not to find an answer is to be destroyed.
-Sir Randol Fawkes
“Living as we are on these Islands we are children of the sea. Living on these Family Islands, we are one Family. As our Islands are part of God’s great Universe we are children of the Universe, no less than the trees and the stars. Yes, we do have a right to be here. And whether or not it is clear to all of us, the Universe is unfolding as it should”.
These are the words of Sir Lynden Pindling in 1972 at the National Conference on Independence. This was 40 years ago when the question of who is a Bahamian first arose. Now forty years later these words would have an even deeper meaning for so many Bahamians who wish to be included in this, our story. We the Rastafari community of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas, would like to remind our brothers and sisters of those wise words....Whether or not it is clear to all of us the Universe is unfolding as it should...and even we, the Rastafari, have a right to be here.
The Rastafari community of the Bahamas has had a long history of being oppressed, as it comprised mainly young black (African) youth, seen as rebels. For these young men, and some women, what began as a desire to reconnect with their African identity burgeoned into a cultural movement, with its foundation in Africa but its reality in the Bahamas. It developed simultaneously with other movements around the world, but independently. Along this journey a myth emerged equating Rastafari to some sort of Dracula; leading to a witch hunt, especially when it came to his rights. When he goes to look for a place to live he experiences this witch hunt. When he goes to seek employment, it's a witch hunt. When he sends his children to school, witch hunt. When he goes to the store, it's a witch hunt. When he goes for government services, it's the same witch hunt. In the eyes of the Police, the Rastafari, woman or man, is permanently a suspect; a never ending witch hunt. This is not what the architects of this land intended for its citizens. At present, on an individual basis there has been some amelioration; unfortunately though, systematically very little has changed.
Today we are asking, on behalf of the tens of thousands of members of the Rastafari community, throughout the length and breadth of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas for our voices to be heard and our inalienable human rights and civil rights to be upheld. In the words of Sir Lynden Pindling, “Whether or not it is clear to all of us...We have a right to be here”.
Rastafari is an indigenous African cultural expression. It is just as African as Junkanoo, as the Goombay rhythm and goat skin drums they are played on; as African as Asue, plaiting hair and any other number of African retentions, we proudly boast as fibres of Bahamian identity. Rastafari is just as much a retention. The centrepiece of Rastafari, the Almighty I, Haile Selassie I, is truly an African. Our rituals are authentically African. In all Rastafari gatherings the drums plays an essential role, just as in all indigenous African gatherings. Therefore, if Junkanoo can still be a Bahamian cultural expression while being rooted exclusively in Africa; so too can Rastafari.
There is a misconception that Rastafari belongs to Jamaica. Knowledge of the Rastafari experience in Jamaica would illuminate how much of a myth this is. One cannot deny the role of Jamaica in the Rastafari narrative. However, if a Chinese goes to Brazil and expresses his Chinese culture in Brazil, it is still Chinese culture. If his children carry forward this culture, although being born and raised in Brazil, they may be Brazilian legally, but with Chinese cultural retention. So it is with Rastafari, wherever it manifests itself. We are the children of those Africans forcibly removed from our homeland, whether in Jamaica, Bahamas or anywhere in the Diaspora. So we are culturally African and legally Bahamian, Jamaican,kwk. The one does not rule out the other.
Being African in the Bahamas has many complications. The African cultural retentions that are recognised and accepted are held as subordinate to European cultural retentions. In the official realm, European cultural hegemony monopolises all functions and activities, such as the Court system and the Parliament. This, coupled with the confinements of the political arm of Christianity, puts unnecessary challenges and unfounded obstacles in the way of Rastafari's development. In the courts not only are judges wearing European garments and wigs; but African cultural retentions of priests keeping their heads covered is not recognised. In Parliament there is not one African expression. This has further consequences than these seemingly superficial examples. The expressions manifest the way one thinks. The European psyche has historically shown disdain and disrespect for cultures outside of its own. If the Court system is based on this pedagogy and the officers are using it also, the Rastafari, which is authentically African, stands disadvantaged. European cultural retentions have been accepted as rigid models of civility. This has not been positive for those who are still Bahamian citizens but adhere to a more germane cultural identity.
The challenge of the Rastafari community is one deep within the hidden ironies of the Bahamian historical context. These ironies are a direct result of the exploitation and abuses of colonialism, something Africans had neither voice, nor choice in participation. The ironies first must be articulated, then validated as deviations from international standards (moral codes), then shown to be alive and well today in metamorphosed forms. Even still our rights can be disregarded, and nothing changes. Only the Constitution can provide the necessary protection in this context as the Supreme Law of the land. This is the only way to ensure our legitimisation locally and the entrenchment of our rights; a step which would not only lead the Bahamas forward, but make the Bahamas a leader among nations.
Historical Context
In 1492 Christopher Columbus was found by the then inhabitants of the Bahamas, the Taino Arawaks. After his long voyage across the Atlantic, just before his crew as about to perform a mutiny and return home, the Taino Arawaks appeared and led them to their home. In return Columbus would kidnap these benevolent souls and force them on a search for gold. Columbus would not himself return to the Bahamas, but initiated a legacy with this landfall. Among the first things he did was to disrespect the indigenous people, their culture and their sovereignty. He planted a flag and claimed Guanahani, for the King and Queen of Spain in the name of their Christian God, then changed the name to Baha Mar. The overriding philosophy as pronounced by the Papal Bull of 1493, Inter caetera, was that if a people were not Christian they could be subjugated and Christianised. Here begins European cultural assault, which they called evangelism. It ushered in an era, in which the rights of people who fell outside of Christianity were taken away. Many indigenous people were enslaved and died as a result of this pedagogy.
Within 25 years the Bahamas, was depopulated. Its only utility for the European invaders was a slaver's mall. The Europeans occupied the larger islands to the South like present day Cuba and Hispaniola (island shared by Haiti and the Dominican Republic). They often visited the Bahamas to capture the peace loving Tainos. During this time the Bahamas remained unpopulated until many years later. This disregard for humanity soon led to the depopulation of the entire region. Millions, maybe even billions of, Native Americans would lose their lives before a Catholic priest, Bartholomew de Las Casas, suggested to use Africans instead. This would occur less than 50 years after Columbus' initial landfall; population decimated.
This ushered in the epoch of the Trans-Atlantic slave trade. Here is where African ancestors were forced into this narrative. European cultural assault was blossoming all over the world and Africa was no exception. Europeans began a simple trade with Africans, then got greedy and began to forcefully take over African lands and kidnap Africans from their homes, their families, their culture, their identity. Of course it is necessary to note that some Africans made this possible, but were in no way the principle beneficiaries. It is important to note this interaction as it is a common thread in maintaining European cultural assault and subsequent hegemony from then to now. Europeans always work with those willing to abandon their cultural mores, abandon their people, from then... to now; compensating them handsomely for it.
The enslaved Africans were forced to abandon their entire identity. First loaded in dungeons for months, then loaded into the hulls of shipped back tight like sardines in a can. Chained in place, they were forced to bleed, urinate and defecate all over each other, as rats ate at their skins. They were only allowed out of this cramped quarters for an occasional exercise. Men, women and children were susceptible to being raped, with little resistance from their chained, broken bodies. Upon arriving in the New World the ships would dock at an empty island and season the enslaved Africans. This seasoning involved preparing them for sale. It involved preparing their bodies and minds for subjugation, but mostly their minds. In order for slavery to work it was imperative to control the minds of Africans and convince them this was their lot in life. Christianity was major tool in this process. Africans, through public displays of torture and mutilation, were kept in a constant state of terror. This is the only way a European minority could control the African majority, unadulterated terror. During this time the African was seen as less than man and therefore void of culture. The Eurocentric Christian culture would be forced on these Africans, with very real and implied threats. African cultural expressions were vilified by Europeans and any sight of them meant definite punishment, unless if it was for the entertainment of Europeans. Even further, the Europeans had a particular practice of rewarding those who were more willing to accept their stations in life; those who did not resist this ripping away of their bodies from their culture, their soul.
The Bahamas eventually fell into the hands of the British, another European power, with the same pedagogy; no respect for anyone or anything that did not support their cultural hegemony. This terror would last for hundreds of years. This physical bondage of slavery would end in 1838, but slavery was much more than physical, as stated. The beneficiaries of that horrific system at its close would be compensated, while those whose blood sweat and tears were the lifeline of this evil regime, were not. As a matter of fact they were still dependant on the slave masters who owned everything in the respective societies, including all the land. Although the machination of slavery had ended the cultural paradigm which guided it prevailed. No longer were shackles on our feet, but the hegemony which fosters European cultural domination remained intact on our consciousness. The ideological framework which promoted African cultural identity as inferior to that of Europe persisted. This era was laced with African nationalist looking to assuage the effects of that ideological framework on the sufferers. All were met with death, incarceration or institutional molestation. Locally, these include the likes of Quarino, who was killed for his efforts, and of Dr. Robert Love(1839-1941), the precursor and inspiration, for the world renowned Marcus Garvey. Dr. Love, as an Anglican priest, was forced to leave the Bahamas to find an accepting space for his African nationalist perspective. There was no room for it in the Bahamas. Churches represented God as a white man with blond hair, as far away from African as possible. Schools subliminally reinforce European culture and call it tradition; but whose tradition? Civil Society only tolerates and rewards those Africans who show a mastery of European culture.
As years transpired, now free, the African population did all it could to mobilise its development. However all the structures of society were set up against them. These structures were built upon and guided by European superiority complex. The only aspects of life for the recently freed that were not dominated by this complex were those they had managed to retain from Africa. Every one of these features were necessary components for their survival and development; from backyard gardens to asue to plaiting hair to using drums. In this new era an old rule remained; in order to advance in this society one had to abandon their African traditions, especially those which make Europens, or their black cronies, uncomfortable. This manifested very subtly. For example, when the descendants of these enslaved Africans went to university and returned, the asue was no longer a sufficient economic institution. A subtle but powerful paradigm shift. As a result the retentions were threatened even more as the African population was seduced by material advancement and social mobility to abandon those things which had sustained us for centuries. The food that made us strong like porridge was traded for less nutritious, more processed food like corn flakes. In this generation we are reaping the rewards of this abandonment. Our old neighbourhoods, traditional black communities, like Fox Hill and Bain's Town, were abandoned as the new intelligentsia, with their elitist attitude, saw no use for the ways of their parents and the old homesteads were a source of shame. This facilitated a void in our communities that is now filled with crime and violence. Those who have abandoned these communities seem to be the loudest detractors. This was seen in the responses of people like Sir Milo Butler to the number one grassroots movement of the Bahamas; the Burma Road Riot of 1942. Intellectuals continue to disregard it as inconsequential, disrespecting the one time the masses of Bahamian workers did not depend on some personage in the intelligentsia to solve their problems. Many black leaders of the day blamed the whole incident on alcohol. This can be inferred to be the beginning of an elite, black, buffer class separation from the African cultured masses; making abandonment en vogue.
In the 1960's, with the help of the masses this elite group of Africans, championed the causes of Majority Rule, followed by Independence of the early 70's. As stated before, the Burma Road Riot was the precursor and opened the door for both movements. A common battlecry on the road to Independence was, Remember Burma Road. It was the first time, with few exceptions since, that the people of the Bahamas and not some group of elites determined their own destiny and that of the nation. Burma Road also signifies the masses handing over their authority and destiny to those whom they felt were better equipped to lead; those who paraded as if they were one and the same, but would abandon them as soon as possible; perpetually running behind the validation of the descendants of the old oppressors; if not all, a majority.
Amajor flaw of Majority Rule/Independence was that the new black leadership used the same formula as their predecessors; Parliament and the Treasury became a private boys club and its kitty. This entrenched the economy in the hands of the Bay Street Boys and their descendants, with a few more blacks benefitting. Socially the new elite also retained the mores and perspectives of those predecessors, whom they sought validation. This is why much of what is said today is simply an echo of what white Bahamians said about black (African) Bahamians a long time ago.
This brings us to present day, 2013; a time where the local power still rests in the hands of that elite; a conglomerate of intellectuals, businessmen, lawyers, and bankers. No longer was this group bound together strictly by race, but by ideological perspective, an anti-African ideological perspective. The leadership of the masses have proven their loyalty to those who once oppressed them in every way possible. They have kept everything intact. For example the issues that fuelled the movement that lead to Majority Rule still exists; cost of living too high, housing issues, overcrowded, poorly equipped schools, local people not benefitting from large scale local developments, and an insensitive leadership who exploit the resources for their own personal benefit. None of these leaders outwardly espouse any African expressions, showing the cultural ethos they adhere too. They few that manage to espouse these Afrocentric views are overwhelmed by the majority who dictate culture. It has already been established how this European ethos regards African culture. This new African/mulatto elite can be more harsh toward African expressions than their predecessors. This new African elite did nothing to formalise, standardise, or legitimise the cultural expressions that had sustained them and their ancestors. They did the opposite and labelled those who use them inferior. An example of this is the use of Bahamian dialect and how it is regarded. So here we are, as Rastafari, Diasporic Defenders of African culture in a seemingly anti-African society, fighting for the rights that are enjoyed by other members of society; fighting for the right to live free from unfair and unjust hindrances to our development.
The Constitution- Protector of Rights for Majority and Minority. Everywhere one goes, no matter the country, there is a constant struggle to achieve equity and balance in the society. The rule of law requires that people should be governed by accepted rules, rather than by the arbitrary decisions of rulers. These rules should be general and abstract, known and certain, and apply equally to all individuals.
There have been many theories and instruments tried and tested. In the Bahamas the Constitution is that document that seeks to provide the balance required for the sustained functioning of society. An efficient and effective constitution allows government to function to protect the lives and liberties of citizens without violating the rights of some to provide gains to others.
These words are of particular significance to the Rastafari community. As it is not that we do not have rights under the Constitution. However the interpretation of the Articles contained within amount to a violation of our rights to provide gain to others, namely those who adhere to the Eurocentric cultural perspective, which renders every other culture, inferior. This sentiment goes even further, as it suggests that it is acceptable to deny the rights of those outside of that cultural ethos. The Preamble of the Constitution is erroneously given as foundation for denial of Rastafari, as it mentions Christian values. It actually reads, WHEREAS the People of this Family of Islands recognizing that the preservation of their Freedom will be guaranteed by a national commitment to Self-discipline, Industry, Loyalty, Unity and an abiding respect for Christian values and the Rule of Law.
Somehow in this Dracula syndrome it is felt that respect for human rights is not a "must". It seems more Christ-like to be open to other faiths, like how Christ was with the woman at the well. Even further the document says a respect for Christian values. There is no proof that the values of Rastafari are inherently different from those of Christianity. All religions, faiths, ways of life are based on Universal truths which are embodied in true Christian values. However it is the political side of Christianity that cause others rights to be infringed upon. We are calling on the authorities to be brave enough to correct this misperception, as it affects the lives of citizens. These five words are given more weight than Rule of Law. This defeats the whole purpose of having a Constitution; guaranteeing the rights of ALL Citizens. As it stands under this interpretation some citizens have more rights than others. As far as the Rastafari, it means even some foreigners have more rights than us.
The American Government in attempts to recognise the rights of all have given no religion, majority or minority, a special place or advantage with Government. They have chosen to not recognise any and separate the Church and State altogether. The Bahamas can aid the development of the world solving a challenge that developed countries like America has not; achieving balance of power. The Bahamas, although holding fast to Christian values, should not hinder the progress and development of other faiths, as this is out of line with the Constitution. Giving all established faiths equity sets a precedent for the world to follow. Giving rights to others do not limit the rights of Christians, but reinforces them.
The Constitution continues; We the Inheritors of and Successors to this Family of Islands... DO HEREBY PROCLAIM IN SOLEMN PRAISE the Establishment of a Free and Democratic Sovereign Nation founded on Spiritual Values and in which no Man, Woman or Child shall ever be Slave or Bondsman to anyone or their Labour exploited or (have) their Lives frustrated by deprivation,...
This aspect of the Preamble is totally disregarded in dealing with the Rastafari community. There should also be reference to guaranteeing fundamental Human rights as outlined by the UN Declaration on Human Rights, to which the Bahamas is a signatory. There should also be a statement guaranteeing no group shall have an advantage over another.
Addressing these concerns in the Preamble are very necessary for laying a foundation for the future, while addressing concerns of the present. It is from here that all the Articles are interpreted and it should be as clear about fairness and balance as possible.
Article 1 of the Constitution states, The Commonwealth of the Bahamas shall be a sovereign Democratic State. It is impossible to be Sovereign and a foreign family is forever and perpetually your head of State...that is an oxymoron, no matter how cleverly explained....it's just a cleverly explained oxymoron. What does it do to the self esteem of the people? How are we to see ourselves connected with ultimate authority if we are to forever pay homage to people who do not live here? This does much damage to the national psyche. Perhaps if the brothers doing all the murders saw themselves as having potential of becoming King of the Bahamas, they might not kill each other so easily. No matter what any Bahamian does the highest title they can hold locally is to represent someone else. It is ironic that representing others has become an accepted mode of financial and social mobility, this anomaly, has gone unchallenged. This has trickled down to the average citizen who treats foreigners of a certain hue much better than their own brothers and sisters; but this is no longer acceptable. A major blow to this malpractice would be to sever ties with the Royal Family of England and believe in ourselves enough to deal with the consequences.
Further, no law should be put in place that gives a foreign national an advantage over the Bahamian, on any grounds, financial, political or otherwise. The Government should not be coerced in overlooking the rights of its citizens for the benefit of foreign countries or their nationals. This also reinforces the perception that what is local is somehow of less value. A people without self esteem will never achieve their full potential and may degenerate into beings without regard for anything of value. The Constitution must protect the rights of the powerful as well as the powerless, and balance the inhumane tendencies of the powerful.
Article 17 Protection from Inhuman Treatment. No person shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Inhumane or degrading should be outlined; left up to interpretation, without any guidelines facilitate abuse. The Rastafari community knows too much about this form of abuse, institutionally. The Police use profiling against Rastafari without regard. Rastafari have countless numbers of stories of being arrested without cause. If a crime is committed and a Rastafari is around he is immediately a suspect until he can be exonerated.
We cannot say that no Rastafari will ever commit a crime. For his crime he must pay. However to cut his locks while he is serving his time is cruel and inhumane. He is suffering two forms of punishment; one for his crime and one for his identity. This article should protect him but it does not. This is a matter that has gone before the courts and precedent has been set against the cutting of locks. The Rastafari priest who won the ruling, never benefitted from it, as he was shaved as he entered prison.
The abuse of power by the Royal Bahamas Police Force in their zeal to solve crime is very topical, and not without reason. Stories have circulated for years of beating with baseball bats on joints, waterboarding, placing plastic bags over heads and other forms of torture. Citizens have died in Police custody. Placing cameras in police cars and interrogation rooms will either disprove claims or eradicate abuses. The Police Force seems to be the biggest culprit in breaking this Article when dealing with Citizens, especially those of African descent. Article 19 Protection from Arbitrary Arrest or Detention. No person shall be deprived of his personal liberty save as may be authorized by law in any of the following cases
(d) upon reasonable suspicion of his having committed, or of being about to commit, a criminal offence;
Reasonable suspicion must be more clearly defined. As it stands now with the untamed profiling practiced by State institutions and apparatus, leaves Rastafari at a definite disadvantage. Wearing locks somehow means you are automatically labelled a criminal or less deserving of assistance. To the hundreds of Rastafari professionals, this is a disrespect. The Constitution alone can address this concern of institutional discrimination. One wonders if at the Police College trainees are taught this profiling as it is so pervasive.
Article 22 Protection of Freedom of Conscience. Except with his consent, no person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his freedom of conscience, and for the purposes of this Article the said freedom includes freedom of thought and of religion, freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others, and both in public and in private, to manifest and propagate his religion of belief in worship, teaching, practice and observance.
How can one have this right spelt out but still not be protected by law, especially from unfounded abuses socially? This should not only apply to the State’s relationship with its citizens, but citizen’s relationship with each other. If Rastafari have the right to be Rastafari under the Constitution, then we should also be protected. At present we are not. Christians are allowed carte banc, freedoms, even when it infringes on others; while the others, of which Rastafari is only one, are expected to suffer in silence or become Christians. The Article continues,
Except with his consent (or, if he is a person who has not attained the age of eighteen years, the consent of his guardian) no person attending any place of education shall be required to receive religious instruction or to take part in or attend any religious ceremony or observance of that instruction, ceremony or observance relates to a religion other than his own.
Nowhere does the Constitution give the right to private entities , open to public, the right to discriminate wholesale against a particular group in society....Isn’t that what our National heroes, especially Randal Fawkes fought against? If this Article speaks to people of one faith interacting with schools of another faith and regulates the interaction, it only stands to reason that it is not acceptable to deny entry into these institutions based on that faith. Every major school in the Bahamas right now is in breach of this Article. The architects of this document, and the nation, always had in mind working with the oppressed and uplifting them as stated by Sir Randol Fawkes, There is no other indigenous group more qualified for the title of oppressed, than Rastafari!
Article 22 goes even further to entrench the right to practice a faith without interference, (5) Nothing contained in or done under the authority of any law shall be held to be inconsistent with or in contravention of this Article to the extent that the law in question makes provision which is reasonably required-
(b) for the purpose of protecting the rights and freedoms of other persons, including the right to observe and practice any religion without the unsolicited interference of member of any other religion.
This Article is totally forgotten about when dealing with Rastafari...how else could Church and school leaders say it is okay to deprive youth of education.....or employers say it is okay to discriminate against or landlords refuse to rent to Rastafari. No institution, especially those who the guardians of morality, be allowed to cloak their discrimination tactics....It is unreasonable... It is unjustified...It is unconstitutional!
Article 26; Protection from discrimination on the grounds of race, etc.(3) In this Article, the expression "discriminatory" means affording different treatment to different person attributable wholly or mainly to their respective descriptions by race, place of origin political opinions colour or creed whereby person of one such description are subjected to disabilities or restrictions to which person of another such description are not made subject or are accorded privileges or advantages which are not accorded to persons of another such description.
Term "description" opens Article to protect Rastafari. Rastafari are simply Africans being African (adhering to African culture), but unfortunately it seems only Africans willing to be Europeans are protected. If one were to take a cultural inventory of our society, one would say that European culture dominates throughout the official realms, as already outlined. To deny my rights to look and act as an African is discrimination based on race, place of origin and creed. We as Africans who want to be Africans are subjected to disabilities and restrictions. This is demonstrated By Arianna Bain in education, hiring practices in labor, track record of Police interaction, cutting of locks in prison. That is, there is not one aspect of society where the Rastafari are not disadvantaged and the Christian accorded privileges and advantages.
Rastafari has history of non-involvement in the political process. This has led to an assertion that this is grounds for our not having a voice. This is a widely held misconception that must be corrected. The Constitution ensures one’s rights as a citizen, regardless of how active one is. Voting does not guarantee one’s rights, but voting is one of those rights.
(4) Paragraph (1) of this Article shall not apply to any law so far as that law makes provision- (d) whereby persons of any such description as is mentioned in paragraph (3) for this Article may be subjected to any disability or restriction or may be accorded any privilege or advantage which having regard to its nature and to special circumstances pertaining to those persons or to persons of any other such description, is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society.
Here is where the African socio-cultural influence is ignored in the court of law..and European traditions/ mores, upheld. As Rastafari and other minorities are often not seen to be included in this section. No provisions are made in the court to balance these mitigating circumstances. It would be hard since no officer of the court adheres to African values, all being Christian. In Christianity one is deemed disloyal and on the way to hell, for not siding with established Christian practices, which puts non-Christians at a disadvantage.(7)
Subject to the provisions of subparagraph (4)(e) and of paragraph (9) of this Article no person shall be treated in a discriminatory manner in respect of access to any of the following places to which the general public have access, namely, shops, hotels, restaurants, eating-houses, licensed premises, places of entertainment or places of resort.
Educational facilities and places of employment should be included in this also. The rights of citizens should supersede the rights of a business entity, especially when that entity controls/ affects access to human development and national progress. Denying Arianna has done more damage to national development, than allowing her in would damage Christian principles. The powers that be must step in and address the concerns of this sector of society; a growing number of people who fall outside of the majority. Whether it be the Rastafari community, other adherents to African culture, the Moslem, the disabled, or Bahamians of Haitian parents; the voices of this group must be heard and their rights upheld by the Constitution. The mark of a civilised society is its ability to address the needs of its citizens; the lack of courage and wisdom to address concerns of the least among us, forever relegates the Bahamas to a state underdevelopment. Who will be the brave ones to usher the next phase of development? We trust that it is you! The future of the Bahamas hopes that it is you...but we will continue to work until we achieve our goal.
“There is no safety for anyone except in the freedom for all.”
Sir Randol Fawkes